Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility Skip to content

Today's Daf Yomi

September 3, 2017 | 讬状讘 讘讗诇讜诇 转砖注状讝

  • This month鈥檚 learning is sponsored by Jon and Yael Cohen in memory of Dr. Robert Van Amerongen.聽May his memory be blessed.

Sanhedrin 49

When King Solomon had Yoav ben Tzruya executed, on what basis did he kill him? 聽Even though the gemara聽shows he was worthy of the death he received, in the end the gemara brings sources that he also had redeeming qualities. 聽What is the order of the 4 death penalties – which is more severe? 聽Less severe? 聽In general when mishnayot聽sets the order of events or items, is it intentional or not?


If the lesson doesn't play, click "Download"

转讛讗 诇讜讟讗 讜诇讗 转讛讗 诇讗讟讛

Be the one who is cursed and not the one who curses, as a curse eventually returns to the one who curses.

讗转讬讜讛 诇讬讜讗讘 讚讬讬谞讬讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 拽讟诇转讬讛 诇讗讘谞专 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讙讜讗诇 讛讚诐 讚注砖讗诇 讛讜讗讬 注砖讗诇 专讜讚祝 讛讜讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛讬讛 诇讜 诇讛爪讬诇讜 讘讗讞讚 诪讗讘专讬讜

The Gemara returns to discuss the incident of Joab: They brought Joab before Solomon, who judged him. Solomon said to Joab: What is the reason that you killed Abner? Joab said to him: I was the blood redeemer of the blood of Asahel; when Abner murdered my brother Asahel I killed him, in fulfillment of my duty as his blood redeemer. Solomon said to him: But Asahel was pursuing Abner with the intention of killing him, and therefore he had the status of a pursuer. Since Abner killed Asahel in an act of self-defense, you had no right to kill him as a redeemer of Asahel鈥檚 blood. Joab said to Solomon: Abner could have saved himself by wounding Asahel in one of his limbs. Having failed to do so, he was guilty of murder, and I was therefore entitled to kill him.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 诇讗 讬讻讬诇 诇讬讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛砖转讗 讘讚讜驻谉 讞诪讬砖讬转 讻讬讜谉 诇讬讛 讚讻转讬讘 壮讜讬讻讛讜 讗讘谞专 讘讗讞专讬 讛讞谞讬转 讗诇 讛讞诪砖壮 讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讘讚讜驻谉 讞诪讬砖讬转 讘诪拽讜诐 砖诪专讛 讜讻讘讚 转诇讜讬讬谉 讘讜 讘讗讞讚 诪讗讘专讬讜 诇讗 讬讻讬诇 诇讬讛

Solomon said to him: Abner was not able to injure Asahel, because he was running and could not aim with precision. Joab said to Solomon: Now Abner was able to aim and hit him precisely in the fifth rib, as it is written: 鈥淎nd Abner smote him with the butt end of the spear in the 岣mesh (II聽Samuel 2:23), and Rabbi Yo岣nan says that this means that he hit him in the fifth rib, the place where the gallbladder and liver hang. If Abner could aim with precision at the fifth rib, could he not have successfully aimed at one of Asahel鈥檚 limbs?

讗诪专 诇讬讛 谞讬讝讬诇 讗讘谞专 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 拽讟诇转讬讛 诇注诪砖讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 注诪砖讗 诪讜专讚 讘诪诇讻讜转 讛讜讛 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬讗诪专 讛诪诇讱 诇注诪砖讗 讛讝注拽 诇讬 讗转 讗讬砖 讬讛讜讚讛 砖诇砖转 讬诪讬诐 讜讙讜壮 讜讬诇讱 注诪砖讗 诇讛讝注讬拽 讗转 讬讛讜讚讛 讜讬讜讞专 讜讙讜壮

Solomon said to Joab: Set aside Abner, as you have presented a convincing argument that you are not liable for his death. But what is the reason you killed Amasa? Abner said to him: I killed Amasa in punishment for his having rebelled against the king, as it is written: 鈥淎nd the king said to Amasa: Muster to me the men of Judah within three days, and be you here present. And Amasa went to call the men of Judah, but he was later than the set time that he had assigned to him鈥 (II聽Samuel 20:4鈥5).

讗诪专 诇讬讛 注诪砖讗 讗讻讬谉 讜专拽讬谉 讚专砖

Solomon said to him: Amasa was not guilty of rebelling against the king because he interpreted the words akh and rak in a restrictive manner, and in that way he limited the king鈥檚 authority.

讗砖讻讞讬谞讛讜 讚驻转讬讞 诇讛讜 讘诪住讻转讗 讗诪专 讻转讬讘 壮讻诇 讗讬砖 讗砖专 讬诪专讛 讗转 驻讬讱 讜诇讗 讬砖诪注 讗转 讚讘专讬讱 诇讻诇 讗砖专 转爪讜谞讜 讬讜诪转壮 讬讻讜诇 讗驻讬诇讜 诇讚讘专讬 转讜专讛 转诇诪讜讚 诇讜诪专 壮专拽 讞讝拽 讜讗诪抓壮

How so? Amasa found the men of Judah starting to study a new tractate. He said to himself: It is written: 鈥淎ny man who rebels against your commandment, and will not listen to your words in all that you command him, he shall be put to death鈥 (Joshua 1:18), indicating that the king of Israel has unlimited power. Based on these words alone, one might have thought that the king must be obeyed even when that would lead to abstention from the study of the words of Torah. Therefore, that same verse states: 鈥淥nly [rak] be strong and of a good courage.鈥 The word 鈥rak鈥 is a restrictive term that serves to limit the king鈥檚 authority in a situation where obeying his command will minimalize the study of Torah. Consequently, Amasa was justified when he did not muster the men of Judah at the appointed time, and you had no right to kill him.

讗诇讗 讛讛讜讗 讙讘专讗 诪讜专讚 讘诪诇讻讜转 讛讜讛 讚讻转讬讘 壮讜讛砖诪注讛 讘讗讛 注讚 讬讜讗讘 讻讬 讬讜讗讘 谞讟讛 讗讞专讬 讗讚谞讬讛 讜讗讞专讬 讗讘砖诇讜诐 诇讗 谞讟讛壮

Solomon continued: Rather, the opposite is true. That man, you, Joab, rebelled against the king, as it is written: 鈥淭hen tidings came to Joab, for Joab had followed after Adonijah, though he had not followed after Absalom. And Joab fled to the tent of the Lord and caught hold of the horns of the altar鈥 (I聽Kings 2:28). Joab followed Adonijah, thereby rebelling against Solomon, the lawful king.

诪讗讬 诇讗 谞讟讛 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 砖讘讬拽砖 诇谞讟讜转 讜诇讗 谞讟讛 讜诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 诇讗 谞讟讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 注讚讬讬谉 诇讬讞诇讜讞讬转 砖诇 讚讜讚 拽讬讬诪转

The Gemara asks: What does the verse mean to teach when it says that Joab did not follow Absalom? Rav Yehuda says: It serves to teach that Joab wanted to follow Absalom, but in practice he did not follow him. The Gemara asks: If he wanted to do so, what is the reason that Joab did not follow Absalom? Rabbi Elazar says: When Absalom rebelled against his father, David was still in full possession of his vitality, meaning he was still strong, and Joab feared him.

专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讘专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 讗诪专 注讚讬讬谉 讗讬爪讟讙谞讬谞讬 砖诇 讚讜讚 拽讬讬诪讬谉 讚讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 讗专讘注 诪讗讜转 讬诇讚讬诐 讛讬讜 诇讜 诇讚讜讚 讻讜诇谉 讘谞讬 讬驻转 转讜讗专 讛讬讜 讜诪讙讚诇讬 讘诇讜专讬转 讛讬讜 讜诪讛诇讻讬谉 讘专讗砖讬 讛讙讬讬住讜转 讛讬讜 讜讛谉 讛谉 讘注诇讬 讗讙专讜驻讬谉 砖诇 讚讜讚

Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi 岣nina, says: David鈥檚 stars [itztagninei], the planetary influences that determined his fortune, still stood for him. As Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: David had four hundred children in his army, and all of them were sons of beautiful women taken captive from their gentile homes during war (see Deuteronomy 21:10鈥14), and they grew their hair in a gentile hair style, and they would go at the head of the troops, and they were the strong-arm enforcers of the house of David, on whose loyalty David鈥檚 monarchy relied. As long as David was supported by this force, Joab was afraid to challenge him.

讜驻诇讬讙讗 讚专讘讬 讗讘讗 讘专 讻讛谞讗 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讗 讘专 讻讛谞讗 讗讬诇诪诇讗 讚讜讚 诇讗 注砖讛 讬讜讗讘 诪诇讞诪讛 讜讗讬诇诪诇讗 讬讜讗讘 诇讗 注住拽 讚讜讚 讘转讜专讛 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬讛讬 讚讜讚 注砖讛 诪砖驻讟 讜爪讚拽讛 诇讻诇 注诪讜 讜讬讜讗讘 讘谉 爪专讜讬讛 注诇 讛爪讘讗 诪讛 讟注诐 讚讜讚 注砖讛 诪砖驻讟 讜爪讚拽讛 诇讻诇 注诪讜 诪砖讜诐 讚讬讜讗讘 注诇 讛爪讘讗 讜诪讛 讟注诐 讬讜讗讘 注诇 讛爪讘讗 诪砖讜诐 讚讚讜讚 注砖讛 诪砖驻讟 讜爪讚拽讛 诇讻诇 注诪讜

The Gemara notes: And those who view Joab in a negative light disagree with the opinion of Rabbi Abba bar Kahana, as Rabbi Abba bar Kahana says: Were it not for David, who studied Torah, Joab would not have been able to wage war successfully, and were it not for the military acumen of Joab, David would not have been able to study Torah. As it is written: 鈥淎nd David executed judgment and justice to all his people, and Joab, son of Zeruiah, was over the army鈥 (II聽Samuel 8:15鈥16). What is the reason that David 鈥渆xecuted judgment and justice to all his people鈥? He was able to do so because 鈥淛oab, son of Zeruiah, was over the army,鈥 assisting him and fighting his battles. And what is the reason that 鈥淛oab, son of Zeruiah, was over the army鈥? He was able to do so because 鈥淒avid executed judgment and justice to all his people.鈥

讜讬爪讗 讬讜讗讘 诪注诐 讚讜讚 讜讬砖诇讞 诪诇讗讻讬诐 讗讞专讬 讗讘谞专 讜讬砖讘讜 讗转讜 诪讘讜专 讛住专讛 诪讗讬 讘讜专 讛住讬专讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讗 讘专 讻讛谞讗 讘讜专 讜住讬专讛 讙专诪讜 诇讜 诇讗讘谞专 砖讬讛专讙

搂 The verse states: 鈥淎nd Joab went out from David, and sent messengers after Abner, and they brought him back from Bor Sirah鈥 (II聽Samuel 3:26). The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of the name Bor Sirah? Rabbi Abba bar Kahana says: A well [bor] and a thorn [vesira] caused Abner to be killed. Abner became liable to be killed when he failed to take advantage of two opportunities to bring about a reconciliation between King Saul and David. First, when David cut off a corner of Saul鈥檚 robe after he entered a cave in order to relieve himself, and second, when David found Saul sleeping and took the jug of water and the spear from next to his head. Rather than tell Saul that David could have killed him and refrained from doing so, Abner suggested to Saul that his robe may have been torn by a thornbush and that his jug of water may have been taken by one of his own men. These two incidents are alluded to by the words bor, well, i.e., jug of water, and sira, thornbush.

讜讬讟讛讜 讬讜讗讘 讗诇 转讜讱 讛砖注专 诇讚讘专 讗转讜 讘砖诇讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 砖讚谞讜 讚讬谉 住谞讛讚专讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 拽讟诇转讬讛 诇注砖讗诇 注砖讗诇 专讜讚祝 讛讬讛 讛讬讛 诇讱 诇讛爪讬诇讜 讘讗讞讚 诪讗讘专讬讜 诇讗 讬讻讬诇讬 诇讬讛 讛砖转讗 讘讚讜驻谉 讞诪讬砖讬转 讻讜讜谞转 诇讬讛 讘讗讞讚 诪讗讘专讬讜 诇讗 讬讻诇转 诇讬讛

The verse states: 鈥淎nd Joab took him aside in the gate to speak with him quietly鈥 (II聽Samuel 3:27). Rabbi Yo岣nan says: Joab judged Abner according to the halakha of the Sanhedrin, which would sit in judgment by the gate of the city. How so? Joab said to Abner: What is the reason that you killed Asahel? Abner said to him: Asahel was pursuing me with the intention to kill me, and therefore he had the status of a pursuer, whom I had the right to kill in self-defense. Joab said to Abner: Even so, you could have saved yourself by wounding one of his limbs. Abner replied: I was not able to do so as I was running and could not aim with precision. Joab said to him: Now seeing that you were able to aim and hit him precisely in the fifth rib, could you not have successfully aimed at one of his limbs?

诇讚讘专 讗转讜 讘砖诇讬 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 注诇 注讬住拽讬 砖诇讜 讜讬讻讛讜 砖诐 讗诇 讛讞诪砖 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讘讚讜驻谉 讞诪讬砖讬转 诪拽讜诐 砖诪专讛 讜讻讘讚 转诇讜讬讬谉 讘讜

The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of 鈥渢o speak with him quietly [basheli]鈥? Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: He took him aside to speak to him by way of deception [shalu]. As for what is stated: 鈥淎nd Abner smote him with the butt end of the spear in the 岣mesh (II聽Samuel 2:23), Rabbi Yo岣nan says: He hit him in the fifth [岣mishit] rib, the place where the gallbladder and liver hang.

讜讛砖讬讘 讛壮 讗转 讚诪讜 注诇 专讗砖讜 讗砖专 驻讙注 讘砖谞讬 讗谞砖讬诐 爪讚拽讬诐 讟讜讘讬诐 诪诪谞讜 讟讜讘讬诐 砖讛讬讜 讚讜专砖讬谉 讗讻讬谉 讜专拽讬谉 讜讛讜讗 诇讗 讚专砖 爪讚拽讬诐 砖讛谉 讘驻讛 讜诇讗 注砖讜 讜讛讜讗 讘讗讬讙专转 注砖讛

搂 The verse states that Solomon said to Benaiah, son of Jehoiada, concerning Joab: 鈥淎nd the Lord shall return the blood upon his own head, for he fell upon two men more righteous and better than he鈥 (I聽Kings 2:32). The Gemara explains: Amasa and Abner were 鈥渂etter鈥 that Joab, as they interpreted the words akh and rak in a restrictive manner that limited the king鈥檚 authority, while he did not interpret them in that way, demonstrating that they were greater than him in Torah. Amasa and Abner were also 鈥渕ore righteous鈥 than Joab, as they both received oral instructions directly from Saul to slay the priests of Nov and they did not do so, whereas Joab was instructed by David in a letter to kill Uriah and he did so.

讜注诪砖讗 诇讗 谞砖诪专 讘讞专讘 讗砖专 讘讬讚 讬讜讗讘 讗诪专 专讘 砖诇讗 讞砖讚讜

The verse states: 鈥淏ut Amasa took no heed of the sword in Joab鈥檚 hand鈥 (II聽Samuel 20:10). Rav says: Amasa took no heed of the sword because he did not suspect that Joab was capable of murdering him.

讜讬拽讘专 讘讘讬转讜 讘诪讚讘专 讗讟讜 讘讬转讜 诪讚讘专 讛讜讗 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 讻诪讚讘专 诪讛 诪讚讘专 诪讜驻拽专 诇讻诇 讗祝 讘讬转讜 砖诇 讬讜讗讘 诪讜驻拽专 诇讻诇 讚讘专 讗讞专 讻诪讚讘专 诪讛 诪讚讘专 诪谞讜拽讛 诪讙讝诇 讜注专讬讜转 讗祝 讘讬转讜 砖诇 讬讜讗讘 诪谞讜拽讛 诪讙讝诇 讜注专讬讜转 讜讬讜讗讘 讬讞讬讛 讗转 砖讗专 讛注讬专 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗驻讬诇讜 诪讜谞讬谞讬 讜爪讞谞转讗 讟注讬诐 驻专讬住 诇讛讜

The verse states with regard to Joab: 鈥淎nd he was buried in his own house, in the wilderness鈥 (I聽Kings 2:34). The Gemara asks: Is that to say that Joab鈥檚 house was a wilderness? Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: Joab鈥檚 house was like the wilderness; just as the wilderness is freely open to all, so too, Joab鈥檚 house was freely open to all, as he generously opened his house to the poor and made them feel like members of the household. Alternatively, Joab鈥檚 house was like the wilderness; just as the wilderness is clean of theft and sexual immorality, as it is uninhabited, so too, Joab鈥檚 house was clean of theft and sexual immorality, owing to his righteousness. As for the verse: 鈥淎nd Joab kept alive the rest of the city鈥 (I聽Chronicles 11:8), Rav Yehuda says: Not only would Joab feed the poor, but he would even give them treats of types of small fish so they would lack for nothing.

讛讚专谉 注诇讱 谞讙诪专 讛讚讬谉

 

诪转谞讬壮 讗专讘注 诪讬转讜转 谞诪住专讜 诇讘讬转 讚讬谉 住拽讬诇讛 砖专讬驻讛 讛专讙 讜讞谞拽 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讗讜诪专 砖专讬驻讛 住拽讬诇讛 讞谞拽 讜讛专讙 讝讜 诪爪讜转 讛谞住拽诇讬谉

MISHNA: Four types of the death penalty were given over to the court, with which those who committed certain transgressions are executed. They are, in descending order of severity: Stoning, burning, killing by decapitation, and strangulation. Rabbi Shimon says: They are, in descending order of severity: Burning, stoning, strangulation, and killing. This execution, described in the previous chapter, is referring to the mitzva of those who are stoned, i.e., to the process of execution by stoning.

讙诪壮 讗诪专 专讘讗 讗诪专 专讘 住讞讜专讗 讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讻诇 诪拽讜诐 砖砖谞讜 讞讻诪讬诐 讚专讱 诪谞讬讬谉 讗讬谉 诪讜拽讚诐 讜诪讗讜讞专 讞讜抓 诪砖讘注讛 住诪谞讬谉

GEMARA: Rava says that Rav Se岣ra says that Rav Huna says: Wherever the Sages taught a halakha by means of a list, there is no significance to the order of their list, except for in the mishna that discusses the seven abrasive substances, where the order is significant.

讚转谞谉 砖讘注讛 住诪谞讬谉 诪注讘讬专讬谉 注诇 讛讻转诐 专讜拽 转驻诇 讜诪讬 讙专讬住讬谉 讜诪讬 专讙诇讬诐 讜谞转专 讜讘讜专讬转 拽诪讜诇讬讗 讜讗砖诇讱

As we learned in a mishna (Nidda 61b): One applies seven abrasive substances to the stain found on a woman鈥檚 clothing in order to find out whether the stain is from menstrual blood, and therefore ritually impure, or whether it is another type of stain, and therefore pure. These substances are: Bland spittle, which is the spittle of someone who has not yet tasted anything in the morning; moisture of grits, which is the spittle of one who has chewed the grits of beans; urine; natron; lye [borit]; Kimolian earth [kimuleya]; and potash. If the stain disappears as a result of the application of all of these substances, the stain is considered to have been from blood.

讜拽转谞讬 住讬驻讗 讛注讘讬专谉 砖诇讗 讻住讬讚专谉 讗讜 砖讛注讘讬专谉 砖讘注转谉 讻讗讞讚 诇讗 注砖讛 讜诇讗 讻诇讜诐

And it is taught in the latter clause of that mishna that the order of the substances is essential, as it states: If one applied them not in the order prescribed for them, or applied all seven of them at once, he has done nothing; the laundering has not been effective.

专讘 驻驻讗 住讘讗 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘 讗诪专 讗祝 讗专讘注 诪讬转讜转 诪讚拽讗 诪驻诇讬讙 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 讚讜拽讗 拽转谞讬 讜讗讬讚讱 讘驻诇讜讙转讗 诇讗 拽讗 诪讬讬专讬

Rav Pappa the elder says in the name of Rav: The four types of the death penalty are also taught in order. This is apparent from the fact that Rabbi Shimon disagrees with the first order; conclude from it that it is taught in an exact order. The Gemara adds: And the other Sage, Rav Huna, does not include this mishna among those in which the order is significant, as he is not speaking of mishnayot where there is a dispute with regard to the correct order.

专讘 驻驻讗 讗诪专 讗祝 住讚专 讬讜诪讗 讚转谞谉 讻诇 诪注砖讛 讬讜诐 讛讻驻讜专讬诐 讛讗诪讜专讬诐 注诇 讛住讚专 讗诐 讛拽讚讬诐 诪注砖讛 诇讞讘讬专讜 诇讗 注砖讛 讜诇讗 讻诇讜诐

Rav Pappa says: The order of the service in the Temple on the Day of Atonement, Yom Kippur, is also taught in its proper order, as we learned in a mishna (Yoma 60a): With regard to all actions performed in the context of the service of Yom Kippur, which are stated in the Mishna, as in the Torah, in order, the halakha is: If the High Priest performed one action before another, i.e., if he diverged from the order that is written, it is as though he has done nothing.

讜讗讬讚讱 讛讛讜讗 讞讜诪专讗 讘注诇诪讗

And the other Sage, Rav Huna, does not include this mishna because that is merely a stringency. Although a change in the order invalidates the Yom Kippur service, this is not due to the importance of some rites relative to others, but because this order was established by the Torah.

专讘 讛讜谞讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 讬讛讜砖注 讗诪专 讗祝 住讚专 转诪讬讚 讚拽转谞讬 注诇讛 讝讛讜 住讚专 转诪讬讚 讜讗讬讚讱 讛讛讜讗 诇诪爪讜讛 讘注诇诪讗

Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, says: The order of the daily offering, described in the mishna at the end of tractate Tamid (33b), is also essential; as it is taught with regard to it: This is the order of the daily offering, indicating that it should be performed in exactly that order. And the other Sage, Rav Huna, does not include this mishna, as that requirement is merely for the mitzva. In other words, it is preferable that the offering be sacrificed in that order, but it is not disqualified if one deviates from that order.

讜诇讗驻讜拽讬 诪诪爪讜转 讞诇讬爪讛 讚转谞谉 诪爪讜转 讞诇讬爪讛 讘讗 讛讜讗 讜讬讘诪转讜 诇驻谞讬 讘讬转 讚讬谉 讛讬讜 谞讜转谞讬谉 诇讜 注爪讛 讛讛讜讙谞转 诇讜 砖谞讗诪专 壮讜拽专讗讜 诇讜 讝拽谞讬 注讬专讜 讜讚讘专讜 讗诇讬讜壮

And Rav Huna鈥檚 principle excludes the mitzva of the ritual through which a man whose married brother dies childless [yavam] frees his late brother鈥檚 wife [yevama] of her levirate bonds [岣litza]; i.e., it teaches that the order of that ceremony is not essential. As we learned in a mishna (Yevamot 106b): The mitzva of 岣litza is performed in this manner: The yavam and his yevama come before the court, and the judges of the court offer him advice that is appropriate for him as to whether to enter levirate marriage or to perform 岣litza, as it is stated: 鈥淎nd the elders of his city shall call him and speak to him鈥 (Deuteronomy 25:8).

讜讛讬讗 讗讜诪专转 壮诪讗谉 讬讘诪讬壮 讜讙讜壮 讜讛讜讗 讗讜诪专 壮诇讗 讞驻爪转讬 诇拽讞转讛壮 讜讘诇砖讜谉 讛拽讚砖 讛讬讜 讗讜诪专讬谉

And if they decide to perform 岣litza, she says: 鈥淢y brother-in-law refused to establish a name for his brother in Israel, he did not wish to consummate the levirate marriage鈥 (Deuteronomy 25:7), and afterward he says: 鈥淚 do not wish to take her鈥 (Deuteronomy 25:8). And they would say these statements in the sacred tongue, Hebrew.

壮讜谞讙砖讛 讬讘诪转讜 讗诇讬讜 诇注讬谞讬 讛讝拽谞讬诐 讜讞诇爪讛 谞注诇讜 讜讬专拽讛 讘驻谞讬讜壮 专讜拽 讛谞专讗讛 诇讚讬讬谞讬谉 壮讜注谞转讛 讜讗诪专讛 讻讻讛 讬注砖讛 诇讗讬砖 讜讙讜壮 讜谞拽专讗 砖诪讜 讘讬砖专讗诇 讜讙讜壮

The verse states: 鈥淗is yevama shall approach him, before the elders, and remove his shoe from on his foot and spit before him鈥 (Deuteronomy 25:9). Accordingly, she removes his shoe and she spits before him a quantity of spittle that is visible to the judges. 鈥淎nd she shall respond and say: So shall it be done to the man who does not build his brother鈥檚 house. And his name shall be called in Israel: The house of he who had his shoe removed鈥 (Deuteronomy 25:9鈥10).

讜讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 诪爪讜转 讞诇讬爪讛 拽讜专讗讛 讜拽讜专讗 讞讜诇爪转 讜专讜拽拽转 讜拽讜专讗讛

And Rav Yehuda says that this is the correct order for the mitzva of 岣litza: She recites the sentence beginning with 鈥淢y brother-in-law refused鈥 (Deuteronomy 25:7), and afterward he recites 鈥淚 do not wish to take her鈥 (Deuteronomy 25:8). Then she removes the shoe, and spits, and recites: 鈥淪o shall it be done to the man who does not build his brother鈥檚 house鈥 (Deuteronomy 25:9).

讜讛讜讬谞谉 讘讛 诪讗讬 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉 诪转谞讬转讬谉 讛讬讗 讛讗 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉 诪爪讜讛 讛讻讬 讜讗讬 讗驻讬讱 诇讬转 诇谉 讘讛 转谞讬讗 谞诪讬 讛讻讬 讘讬谉 砖讛拽讚讬诐 讞诇讬爪讛 诇专拽讬拽讛 讗讜 专拽讬拽讛 诇讞诇讬爪讛 诪讛 砖注砖讛 注砖讜讬

And we discussed it: What is Rav Yehuda teaching us? This is already stated in the mishna. The answer is that this is what Rav Yehuda teaches us: It is a mitzva to perform 岣litza like this, i.e., this is the proper order, but if one switched the order we have no problem with it; the 岣litza is still valid, as the order of the ritual is not essential. This is also taught in a baraita: Whether one performed the removal of the shoe before the spitting, or the spitting before the removal of the shoe, what she did is done, i.e., the 岣litza is valid.

讜诇讗驻讜拽讬 诪讛讗 讚转谞谉 讻讛谉 讙讚讜诇 诪砖诪砖 讘砖诪讜谞讛 讻诇讬诐 讜讛讚讬讜讟 讘讗专讘注讛 讘讻转讜谞转 讘诪讻谞住讬诐 讘诪爪谞驻转 讜讗讘谞讟 诪讜住讬祝 注诇讬讛谉 讻讛谉 讙讚讜诇 讞讜砖谉 讜讗驻讜讚 讜诪注讬诇 讜爪讬抓

And Rav Huna鈥檚 principle also excludes that which we learned in a mishna (Yoma 71b): The High Priest serves, i.e., performs the Temple service, wearing eight garments, and the ordinary priest performs the Temple service wearing four. An ordinary priest performs the Temple service in a tunic, in trousers, in a mitre, and in a belt. The High Priest adds another four garments beyond those worn by the ordinary priest: A breastplate, and an ephod, and a robe, and a frontplate. The order listed in this mishna indicates that the tunic was put on first.

讜转谞讬讗 诪谞讬谉 砖诇讗 讬讛讗 讚讘专 拽讜讚诐 诇诪讻谞住讬诐 砖谞讗诪专 壮讜诪讻谞住讬 讘讚 讬讛讬讜 注诇 讘砖专讜壮

And it is taught in a baraita: From where is it derived that nothing precedes the donning of the trousers when the priest dresses? As it is stated: 鈥淗e shall wear a sacred tunic of linen; and trousers of linen shall be on his flesh鈥 (Leviticus 16:4). This indicates that the trousers come first, as they are worn directly on the flesh, proving that the list in the mishna is not in accordance with the order in which the priests dressed.

讜转谞讗 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讗拽讚诪讬讛 诇讻转讜谞转 诪砖讜诐 讚讗拽讚诪讬讛 拽专讗 讜拽专讗 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讗拽讚诪讬讛 诪砖讜诐 讚诪讻住讬讗 讻讜诇讛 讙讜驻讬讛 注讚讬驻讗 诇讬讛

The Gemara asks: But if so, what is the reason the tanna mentions the tunic first? The Gemara answers: Because the verse mentions it first. The Gemara asks: And what is the reason the verse mentions it first? The Gemara answers: Because it covers his entire body, the Torah prefers to mention it first.

住拽讬诇讛 砖专讬驻讛 讻讜壮 住拽讬诇讛 讞诪讜专讛 诪砖专讬驻讛 砖讻谉 谞讬转谞讛 诇诪讙讚祝 讜诇注讜讘讚 注讘讜讚讛 讝专讛 诪讗讬 讞讜诪专讗 砖讻谉 驻讜砖讟 讬讚讜 讘注讬拽专

搂 The mishna states the types of the death penalty in descending order of severity: Stoning, burning, killing by decapitation, and strangulation. The Gemara discusses the basis for this order. Stoning is considered more severe than burning, as stoning is meted out to one who blasphemes, i.e., one who curses God, and to one who worships idols. For what reason is the severity of these transgressions considered greater than others? Because the transgressor undermines the fundamental tenets of Judaism.

讗讚专讘讛 砖专讬驻讛 讞诪讜专讛 砖讻谉 谞讬转谞讛 诇讘转 讻讛谉 砖讝讬谞转讛 讜诪讗讬 讞讜诪专讗 砖讻谉 诪讞诇诇转 讗转 讗讘讬讛

The Gemara raises an objection: On the contrary; burning is more severe than stoning, as it is meted out to a priest鈥檚 daughter who committed adultery (see Leviticus 21:9). And for what reason is the severity of this transgression considered greater than others? Because through her sin she profanes not only herself but her father as well.

  • This month鈥檚 learning is sponsored by Jon and Yael Cohen in memory of Dr. Robert Van Amerongen.聽May his memory be blessed.

Want to explore more about the Daf?

See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners

Sorry, there aren't any posts in this category yet. We're adding more soon!

Sanhedrin 49

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Sanhedrin 49

转讛讗 诇讜讟讗 讜诇讗 转讛讗 诇讗讟讛

Be the one who is cursed and not the one who curses, as a curse eventually returns to the one who curses.

讗转讬讜讛 诇讬讜讗讘 讚讬讬谞讬讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 拽讟诇转讬讛 诇讗讘谞专 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讙讜讗诇 讛讚诐 讚注砖讗诇 讛讜讗讬 注砖讗诇 专讜讚祝 讛讜讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛讬讛 诇讜 诇讛爪讬诇讜 讘讗讞讚 诪讗讘专讬讜

The Gemara returns to discuss the incident of Joab: They brought Joab before Solomon, who judged him. Solomon said to Joab: What is the reason that you killed Abner? Joab said to him: I was the blood redeemer of the blood of Asahel; when Abner murdered my brother Asahel I killed him, in fulfillment of my duty as his blood redeemer. Solomon said to him: But Asahel was pursuing Abner with the intention of killing him, and therefore he had the status of a pursuer. Since Abner killed Asahel in an act of self-defense, you had no right to kill him as a redeemer of Asahel鈥檚 blood. Joab said to Solomon: Abner could have saved himself by wounding Asahel in one of his limbs. Having failed to do so, he was guilty of murder, and I was therefore entitled to kill him.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 诇讗 讬讻讬诇 诇讬讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛砖转讗 讘讚讜驻谉 讞诪讬砖讬转 讻讬讜谉 诇讬讛 讚讻转讬讘 壮讜讬讻讛讜 讗讘谞专 讘讗讞专讬 讛讞谞讬转 讗诇 讛讞诪砖壮 讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讘讚讜驻谉 讞诪讬砖讬转 讘诪拽讜诐 砖诪专讛 讜讻讘讚 转诇讜讬讬谉 讘讜 讘讗讞讚 诪讗讘专讬讜 诇讗 讬讻讬诇 诇讬讛

Solomon said to him: Abner was not able to injure Asahel, because he was running and could not aim with precision. Joab said to Solomon: Now Abner was able to aim and hit him precisely in the fifth rib, as it is written: 鈥淎nd Abner smote him with the butt end of the spear in the 岣mesh (II聽Samuel 2:23), and Rabbi Yo岣nan says that this means that he hit him in the fifth rib, the place where the gallbladder and liver hang. If Abner could aim with precision at the fifth rib, could he not have successfully aimed at one of Asahel鈥檚 limbs?

讗诪专 诇讬讛 谞讬讝讬诇 讗讘谞专 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 拽讟诇转讬讛 诇注诪砖讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 注诪砖讗 诪讜专讚 讘诪诇讻讜转 讛讜讛 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬讗诪专 讛诪诇讱 诇注诪砖讗 讛讝注拽 诇讬 讗转 讗讬砖 讬讛讜讚讛 砖诇砖转 讬诪讬诐 讜讙讜壮 讜讬诇讱 注诪砖讗 诇讛讝注讬拽 讗转 讬讛讜讚讛 讜讬讜讞专 讜讙讜壮

Solomon said to Joab: Set aside Abner, as you have presented a convincing argument that you are not liable for his death. But what is the reason you killed Amasa? Abner said to him: I killed Amasa in punishment for his having rebelled against the king, as it is written: 鈥淎nd the king said to Amasa: Muster to me the men of Judah within three days, and be you here present. And Amasa went to call the men of Judah, but he was later than the set time that he had assigned to him鈥 (II聽Samuel 20:4鈥5).

讗诪专 诇讬讛 注诪砖讗 讗讻讬谉 讜专拽讬谉 讚专砖

Solomon said to him: Amasa was not guilty of rebelling against the king because he interpreted the words akh and rak in a restrictive manner, and in that way he limited the king鈥檚 authority.

讗砖讻讞讬谞讛讜 讚驻转讬讞 诇讛讜 讘诪住讻转讗 讗诪专 讻转讬讘 壮讻诇 讗讬砖 讗砖专 讬诪专讛 讗转 驻讬讱 讜诇讗 讬砖诪注 讗转 讚讘专讬讱 诇讻诇 讗砖专 转爪讜谞讜 讬讜诪转壮 讬讻讜诇 讗驻讬诇讜 诇讚讘专讬 转讜专讛 转诇诪讜讚 诇讜诪专 壮专拽 讞讝拽 讜讗诪抓壮

How so? Amasa found the men of Judah starting to study a new tractate. He said to himself: It is written: 鈥淎ny man who rebels against your commandment, and will not listen to your words in all that you command him, he shall be put to death鈥 (Joshua 1:18), indicating that the king of Israel has unlimited power. Based on these words alone, one might have thought that the king must be obeyed even when that would lead to abstention from the study of the words of Torah. Therefore, that same verse states: 鈥淥nly [rak] be strong and of a good courage.鈥 The word 鈥rak鈥 is a restrictive term that serves to limit the king鈥檚 authority in a situation where obeying his command will minimalize the study of Torah. Consequently, Amasa was justified when he did not muster the men of Judah at the appointed time, and you had no right to kill him.

讗诇讗 讛讛讜讗 讙讘专讗 诪讜专讚 讘诪诇讻讜转 讛讜讛 讚讻转讬讘 壮讜讛砖诪注讛 讘讗讛 注讚 讬讜讗讘 讻讬 讬讜讗讘 谞讟讛 讗讞专讬 讗讚谞讬讛 讜讗讞专讬 讗讘砖诇讜诐 诇讗 谞讟讛壮

Solomon continued: Rather, the opposite is true. That man, you, Joab, rebelled against the king, as it is written: 鈥淭hen tidings came to Joab, for Joab had followed after Adonijah, though he had not followed after Absalom. And Joab fled to the tent of the Lord and caught hold of the horns of the altar鈥 (I聽Kings 2:28). Joab followed Adonijah, thereby rebelling against Solomon, the lawful king.

诪讗讬 诇讗 谞讟讛 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 砖讘讬拽砖 诇谞讟讜转 讜诇讗 谞讟讛 讜诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 诇讗 谞讟讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 注讚讬讬谉 诇讬讞诇讜讞讬转 砖诇 讚讜讚 拽讬讬诪转

The Gemara asks: What does the verse mean to teach when it says that Joab did not follow Absalom? Rav Yehuda says: It serves to teach that Joab wanted to follow Absalom, but in practice he did not follow him. The Gemara asks: If he wanted to do so, what is the reason that Joab did not follow Absalom? Rabbi Elazar says: When Absalom rebelled against his father, David was still in full possession of his vitality, meaning he was still strong, and Joab feared him.

专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讘专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 讗诪专 注讚讬讬谉 讗讬爪讟讙谞讬谞讬 砖诇 讚讜讚 拽讬讬诪讬谉 讚讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 讗专讘注 诪讗讜转 讬诇讚讬诐 讛讬讜 诇讜 诇讚讜讚 讻讜诇谉 讘谞讬 讬驻转 转讜讗专 讛讬讜 讜诪讙讚诇讬 讘诇讜专讬转 讛讬讜 讜诪讛诇讻讬谉 讘专讗砖讬 讛讙讬讬住讜转 讛讬讜 讜讛谉 讛谉 讘注诇讬 讗讙专讜驻讬谉 砖诇 讚讜讚

Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi 岣nina, says: David鈥檚 stars [itztagninei], the planetary influences that determined his fortune, still stood for him. As Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: David had four hundred children in his army, and all of them were sons of beautiful women taken captive from their gentile homes during war (see Deuteronomy 21:10鈥14), and they grew their hair in a gentile hair style, and they would go at the head of the troops, and they were the strong-arm enforcers of the house of David, on whose loyalty David鈥檚 monarchy relied. As long as David was supported by this force, Joab was afraid to challenge him.

讜驻诇讬讙讗 讚专讘讬 讗讘讗 讘专 讻讛谞讗 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讗 讘专 讻讛谞讗 讗讬诇诪诇讗 讚讜讚 诇讗 注砖讛 讬讜讗讘 诪诇讞诪讛 讜讗讬诇诪诇讗 讬讜讗讘 诇讗 注住拽 讚讜讚 讘转讜专讛 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬讛讬 讚讜讚 注砖讛 诪砖驻讟 讜爪讚拽讛 诇讻诇 注诪讜 讜讬讜讗讘 讘谉 爪专讜讬讛 注诇 讛爪讘讗 诪讛 讟注诐 讚讜讚 注砖讛 诪砖驻讟 讜爪讚拽讛 诇讻诇 注诪讜 诪砖讜诐 讚讬讜讗讘 注诇 讛爪讘讗 讜诪讛 讟注诐 讬讜讗讘 注诇 讛爪讘讗 诪砖讜诐 讚讚讜讚 注砖讛 诪砖驻讟 讜爪讚拽讛 诇讻诇 注诪讜

The Gemara notes: And those who view Joab in a negative light disagree with the opinion of Rabbi Abba bar Kahana, as Rabbi Abba bar Kahana says: Were it not for David, who studied Torah, Joab would not have been able to wage war successfully, and were it not for the military acumen of Joab, David would not have been able to study Torah. As it is written: 鈥淎nd David executed judgment and justice to all his people, and Joab, son of Zeruiah, was over the army鈥 (II聽Samuel 8:15鈥16). What is the reason that David 鈥渆xecuted judgment and justice to all his people鈥? He was able to do so because 鈥淛oab, son of Zeruiah, was over the army,鈥 assisting him and fighting his battles. And what is the reason that 鈥淛oab, son of Zeruiah, was over the army鈥? He was able to do so because 鈥淒avid executed judgment and justice to all his people.鈥

讜讬爪讗 讬讜讗讘 诪注诐 讚讜讚 讜讬砖诇讞 诪诇讗讻讬诐 讗讞专讬 讗讘谞专 讜讬砖讘讜 讗转讜 诪讘讜专 讛住专讛 诪讗讬 讘讜专 讛住讬专讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讗 讘专 讻讛谞讗 讘讜专 讜住讬专讛 讙专诪讜 诇讜 诇讗讘谞专 砖讬讛专讙

搂 The verse states: 鈥淎nd Joab went out from David, and sent messengers after Abner, and they brought him back from Bor Sirah鈥 (II聽Samuel 3:26). The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of the name Bor Sirah? Rabbi Abba bar Kahana says: A well [bor] and a thorn [vesira] caused Abner to be killed. Abner became liable to be killed when he failed to take advantage of two opportunities to bring about a reconciliation between King Saul and David. First, when David cut off a corner of Saul鈥檚 robe after he entered a cave in order to relieve himself, and second, when David found Saul sleeping and took the jug of water and the spear from next to his head. Rather than tell Saul that David could have killed him and refrained from doing so, Abner suggested to Saul that his robe may have been torn by a thornbush and that his jug of water may have been taken by one of his own men. These two incidents are alluded to by the words bor, well, i.e., jug of water, and sira, thornbush.

讜讬讟讛讜 讬讜讗讘 讗诇 转讜讱 讛砖注专 诇讚讘专 讗转讜 讘砖诇讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 砖讚谞讜 讚讬谉 住谞讛讚专讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 拽讟诇转讬讛 诇注砖讗诇 注砖讗诇 专讜讚祝 讛讬讛 讛讬讛 诇讱 诇讛爪讬诇讜 讘讗讞讚 诪讗讘专讬讜 诇讗 讬讻讬诇讬 诇讬讛 讛砖转讗 讘讚讜驻谉 讞诪讬砖讬转 讻讜讜谞转 诇讬讛 讘讗讞讚 诪讗讘专讬讜 诇讗 讬讻诇转 诇讬讛

The verse states: 鈥淎nd Joab took him aside in the gate to speak with him quietly鈥 (II聽Samuel 3:27). Rabbi Yo岣nan says: Joab judged Abner according to the halakha of the Sanhedrin, which would sit in judgment by the gate of the city. How so? Joab said to Abner: What is the reason that you killed Asahel? Abner said to him: Asahel was pursuing me with the intention to kill me, and therefore he had the status of a pursuer, whom I had the right to kill in self-defense. Joab said to Abner: Even so, you could have saved yourself by wounding one of his limbs. Abner replied: I was not able to do so as I was running and could not aim with precision. Joab said to him: Now seeing that you were able to aim and hit him precisely in the fifth rib, could you not have successfully aimed at one of his limbs?

诇讚讘专 讗转讜 讘砖诇讬 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 注诇 注讬住拽讬 砖诇讜 讜讬讻讛讜 砖诐 讗诇 讛讞诪砖 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讘讚讜驻谉 讞诪讬砖讬转 诪拽讜诐 砖诪专讛 讜讻讘讚 转诇讜讬讬谉 讘讜

The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of 鈥渢o speak with him quietly [basheli]鈥? Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: He took him aside to speak to him by way of deception [shalu]. As for what is stated: 鈥淎nd Abner smote him with the butt end of the spear in the 岣mesh (II聽Samuel 2:23), Rabbi Yo岣nan says: He hit him in the fifth [岣mishit] rib, the place where the gallbladder and liver hang.

讜讛砖讬讘 讛壮 讗转 讚诪讜 注诇 专讗砖讜 讗砖专 驻讙注 讘砖谞讬 讗谞砖讬诐 爪讚拽讬诐 讟讜讘讬诐 诪诪谞讜 讟讜讘讬诐 砖讛讬讜 讚讜专砖讬谉 讗讻讬谉 讜专拽讬谉 讜讛讜讗 诇讗 讚专砖 爪讚拽讬诐 砖讛谉 讘驻讛 讜诇讗 注砖讜 讜讛讜讗 讘讗讬讙专转 注砖讛

搂 The verse states that Solomon said to Benaiah, son of Jehoiada, concerning Joab: 鈥淎nd the Lord shall return the blood upon his own head, for he fell upon two men more righteous and better than he鈥 (I聽Kings 2:32). The Gemara explains: Amasa and Abner were 鈥渂etter鈥 that Joab, as they interpreted the words akh and rak in a restrictive manner that limited the king鈥檚 authority, while he did not interpret them in that way, demonstrating that they were greater than him in Torah. Amasa and Abner were also 鈥渕ore righteous鈥 than Joab, as they both received oral instructions directly from Saul to slay the priests of Nov and they did not do so, whereas Joab was instructed by David in a letter to kill Uriah and he did so.

讜注诪砖讗 诇讗 谞砖诪专 讘讞专讘 讗砖专 讘讬讚 讬讜讗讘 讗诪专 专讘 砖诇讗 讞砖讚讜

The verse states: 鈥淏ut Amasa took no heed of the sword in Joab鈥檚 hand鈥 (II聽Samuel 20:10). Rav says: Amasa took no heed of the sword because he did not suspect that Joab was capable of murdering him.

讜讬拽讘专 讘讘讬转讜 讘诪讚讘专 讗讟讜 讘讬转讜 诪讚讘专 讛讜讗 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 讻诪讚讘专 诪讛 诪讚讘专 诪讜驻拽专 诇讻诇 讗祝 讘讬转讜 砖诇 讬讜讗讘 诪讜驻拽专 诇讻诇 讚讘专 讗讞专 讻诪讚讘专 诪讛 诪讚讘专 诪谞讜拽讛 诪讙讝诇 讜注专讬讜转 讗祝 讘讬转讜 砖诇 讬讜讗讘 诪谞讜拽讛 诪讙讝诇 讜注专讬讜转 讜讬讜讗讘 讬讞讬讛 讗转 砖讗专 讛注讬专 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗驻讬诇讜 诪讜谞讬谞讬 讜爪讞谞转讗 讟注讬诐 驻专讬住 诇讛讜

The verse states with regard to Joab: 鈥淎nd he was buried in his own house, in the wilderness鈥 (I聽Kings 2:34). The Gemara asks: Is that to say that Joab鈥檚 house was a wilderness? Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: Joab鈥檚 house was like the wilderness; just as the wilderness is freely open to all, so too, Joab鈥檚 house was freely open to all, as he generously opened his house to the poor and made them feel like members of the household. Alternatively, Joab鈥檚 house was like the wilderness; just as the wilderness is clean of theft and sexual immorality, as it is uninhabited, so too, Joab鈥檚 house was clean of theft and sexual immorality, owing to his righteousness. As for the verse: 鈥淎nd Joab kept alive the rest of the city鈥 (I聽Chronicles 11:8), Rav Yehuda says: Not only would Joab feed the poor, but he would even give them treats of types of small fish so they would lack for nothing.

讛讚专谉 注诇讱 谞讙诪专 讛讚讬谉

 

诪转谞讬壮 讗专讘注 诪讬转讜转 谞诪住专讜 诇讘讬转 讚讬谉 住拽讬诇讛 砖专讬驻讛 讛专讙 讜讞谞拽 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讗讜诪专 砖专讬驻讛 住拽讬诇讛 讞谞拽 讜讛专讙 讝讜 诪爪讜转 讛谞住拽诇讬谉

MISHNA: Four types of the death penalty were given over to the court, with which those who committed certain transgressions are executed. They are, in descending order of severity: Stoning, burning, killing by decapitation, and strangulation. Rabbi Shimon says: They are, in descending order of severity: Burning, stoning, strangulation, and killing. This execution, described in the previous chapter, is referring to the mitzva of those who are stoned, i.e., to the process of execution by stoning.

讙诪壮 讗诪专 专讘讗 讗诪专 专讘 住讞讜专讗 讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讻诇 诪拽讜诐 砖砖谞讜 讞讻诪讬诐 讚专讱 诪谞讬讬谉 讗讬谉 诪讜拽讚诐 讜诪讗讜讞专 讞讜抓 诪砖讘注讛 住诪谞讬谉

GEMARA: Rava says that Rav Se岣ra says that Rav Huna says: Wherever the Sages taught a halakha by means of a list, there is no significance to the order of their list, except for in the mishna that discusses the seven abrasive substances, where the order is significant.

讚转谞谉 砖讘注讛 住诪谞讬谉 诪注讘讬专讬谉 注诇 讛讻转诐 专讜拽 转驻诇 讜诪讬 讙专讬住讬谉 讜诪讬 专讙诇讬诐 讜谞转专 讜讘讜专讬转 拽诪讜诇讬讗 讜讗砖诇讱

As we learned in a mishna (Nidda 61b): One applies seven abrasive substances to the stain found on a woman鈥檚 clothing in order to find out whether the stain is from menstrual blood, and therefore ritually impure, or whether it is another type of stain, and therefore pure. These substances are: Bland spittle, which is the spittle of someone who has not yet tasted anything in the morning; moisture of grits, which is the spittle of one who has chewed the grits of beans; urine; natron; lye [borit]; Kimolian earth [kimuleya]; and potash. If the stain disappears as a result of the application of all of these substances, the stain is considered to have been from blood.

讜拽转谞讬 住讬驻讗 讛注讘讬专谉 砖诇讗 讻住讬讚专谉 讗讜 砖讛注讘讬专谉 砖讘注转谉 讻讗讞讚 诇讗 注砖讛 讜诇讗 讻诇讜诐

And it is taught in the latter clause of that mishna that the order of the substances is essential, as it states: If one applied them not in the order prescribed for them, or applied all seven of them at once, he has done nothing; the laundering has not been effective.

专讘 驻驻讗 住讘讗 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘 讗诪专 讗祝 讗专讘注 诪讬转讜转 诪讚拽讗 诪驻诇讬讙 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 讚讜拽讗 拽转谞讬 讜讗讬讚讱 讘驻诇讜讙转讗 诇讗 拽讗 诪讬讬专讬

Rav Pappa the elder says in the name of Rav: The four types of the death penalty are also taught in order. This is apparent from the fact that Rabbi Shimon disagrees with the first order; conclude from it that it is taught in an exact order. The Gemara adds: And the other Sage, Rav Huna, does not include this mishna among those in which the order is significant, as he is not speaking of mishnayot where there is a dispute with regard to the correct order.

专讘 驻驻讗 讗诪专 讗祝 住讚专 讬讜诪讗 讚转谞谉 讻诇 诪注砖讛 讬讜诐 讛讻驻讜专讬诐 讛讗诪讜专讬诐 注诇 讛住讚专 讗诐 讛拽讚讬诐 诪注砖讛 诇讞讘讬专讜 诇讗 注砖讛 讜诇讗 讻诇讜诐

Rav Pappa says: The order of the service in the Temple on the Day of Atonement, Yom Kippur, is also taught in its proper order, as we learned in a mishna (Yoma 60a): With regard to all actions performed in the context of the service of Yom Kippur, which are stated in the Mishna, as in the Torah, in order, the halakha is: If the High Priest performed one action before another, i.e., if he diverged from the order that is written, it is as though he has done nothing.

讜讗讬讚讱 讛讛讜讗 讞讜诪专讗 讘注诇诪讗

And the other Sage, Rav Huna, does not include this mishna because that is merely a stringency. Although a change in the order invalidates the Yom Kippur service, this is not due to the importance of some rites relative to others, but because this order was established by the Torah.

专讘 讛讜谞讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 讬讛讜砖注 讗诪专 讗祝 住讚专 转诪讬讚 讚拽转谞讬 注诇讛 讝讛讜 住讚专 转诪讬讚 讜讗讬讚讱 讛讛讜讗 诇诪爪讜讛 讘注诇诪讗

Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, says: The order of the daily offering, described in the mishna at the end of tractate Tamid (33b), is also essential; as it is taught with regard to it: This is the order of the daily offering, indicating that it should be performed in exactly that order. And the other Sage, Rav Huna, does not include this mishna, as that requirement is merely for the mitzva. In other words, it is preferable that the offering be sacrificed in that order, but it is not disqualified if one deviates from that order.

讜诇讗驻讜拽讬 诪诪爪讜转 讞诇讬爪讛 讚转谞谉 诪爪讜转 讞诇讬爪讛 讘讗 讛讜讗 讜讬讘诪转讜 诇驻谞讬 讘讬转 讚讬谉 讛讬讜 谞讜转谞讬谉 诇讜 注爪讛 讛讛讜讙谞转 诇讜 砖谞讗诪专 壮讜拽专讗讜 诇讜 讝拽谞讬 注讬专讜 讜讚讘专讜 讗诇讬讜壮

And Rav Huna鈥檚 principle excludes the mitzva of the ritual through which a man whose married brother dies childless [yavam] frees his late brother鈥檚 wife [yevama] of her levirate bonds [岣litza]; i.e., it teaches that the order of that ceremony is not essential. As we learned in a mishna (Yevamot 106b): The mitzva of 岣litza is performed in this manner: The yavam and his yevama come before the court, and the judges of the court offer him advice that is appropriate for him as to whether to enter levirate marriage or to perform 岣litza, as it is stated: 鈥淎nd the elders of his city shall call him and speak to him鈥 (Deuteronomy 25:8).

讜讛讬讗 讗讜诪专转 壮诪讗谉 讬讘诪讬壮 讜讙讜壮 讜讛讜讗 讗讜诪专 壮诇讗 讞驻爪转讬 诇拽讞转讛壮 讜讘诇砖讜谉 讛拽讚砖 讛讬讜 讗讜诪专讬谉

And if they decide to perform 岣litza, she says: 鈥淢y brother-in-law refused to establish a name for his brother in Israel, he did not wish to consummate the levirate marriage鈥 (Deuteronomy 25:7), and afterward he says: 鈥淚 do not wish to take her鈥 (Deuteronomy 25:8). And they would say these statements in the sacred tongue, Hebrew.

壮讜谞讙砖讛 讬讘诪转讜 讗诇讬讜 诇注讬谞讬 讛讝拽谞讬诐 讜讞诇爪讛 谞注诇讜 讜讬专拽讛 讘驻谞讬讜壮 专讜拽 讛谞专讗讛 诇讚讬讬谞讬谉 壮讜注谞转讛 讜讗诪专讛 讻讻讛 讬注砖讛 诇讗讬砖 讜讙讜壮 讜谞拽专讗 砖诪讜 讘讬砖专讗诇 讜讙讜壮

The verse states: 鈥淗is yevama shall approach him, before the elders, and remove his shoe from on his foot and spit before him鈥 (Deuteronomy 25:9). Accordingly, she removes his shoe and she spits before him a quantity of spittle that is visible to the judges. 鈥淎nd she shall respond and say: So shall it be done to the man who does not build his brother鈥檚 house. And his name shall be called in Israel: The house of he who had his shoe removed鈥 (Deuteronomy 25:9鈥10).

讜讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 诪爪讜转 讞诇讬爪讛 拽讜专讗讛 讜拽讜专讗 讞讜诇爪转 讜专讜拽拽转 讜拽讜专讗讛

And Rav Yehuda says that this is the correct order for the mitzva of 岣litza: She recites the sentence beginning with 鈥淢y brother-in-law refused鈥 (Deuteronomy 25:7), and afterward he recites 鈥淚 do not wish to take her鈥 (Deuteronomy 25:8). Then she removes the shoe, and spits, and recites: 鈥淪o shall it be done to the man who does not build his brother鈥檚 house鈥 (Deuteronomy 25:9).

讜讛讜讬谞谉 讘讛 诪讗讬 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉 诪转谞讬转讬谉 讛讬讗 讛讗 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉 诪爪讜讛 讛讻讬 讜讗讬 讗驻讬讱 诇讬转 诇谉 讘讛 转谞讬讗 谞诪讬 讛讻讬 讘讬谉 砖讛拽讚讬诐 讞诇讬爪讛 诇专拽讬拽讛 讗讜 专拽讬拽讛 诇讞诇讬爪讛 诪讛 砖注砖讛 注砖讜讬

And we discussed it: What is Rav Yehuda teaching us? This is already stated in the mishna. The answer is that this is what Rav Yehuda teaches us: It is a mitzva to perform 岣litza like this, i.e., this is the proper order, but if one switched the order we have no problem with it; the 岣litza is still valid, as the order of the ritual is not essential. This is also taught in a baraita: Whether one performed the removal of the shoe before the spitting, or the spitting before the removal of the shoe, what she did is done, i.e., the 岣litza is valid.

讜诇讗驻讜拽讬 诪讛讗 讚转谞谉 讻讛谉 讙讚讜诇 诪砖诪砖 讘砖诪讜谞讛 讻诇讬诐 讜讛讚讬讜讟 讘讗专讘注讛 讘讻转讜谞转 讘诪讻谞住讬诐 讘诪爪谞驻转 讜讗讘谞讟 诪讜住讬祝 注诇讬讛谉 讻讛谉 讙讚讜诇 讞讜砖谉 讜讗驻讜讚 讜诪注讬诇 讜爪讬抓

And Rav Huna鈥檚 principle also excludes that which we learned in a mishna (Yoma 71b): The High Priest serves, i.e., performs the Temple service, wearing eight garments, and the ordinary priest performs the Temple service wearing four. An ordinary priest performs the Temple service in a tunic, in trousers, in a mitre, and in a belt. The High Priest adds another four garments beyond those worn by the ordinary priest: A breastplate, and an ephod, and a robe, and a frontplate. The order listed in this mishna indicates that the tunic was put on first.

讜转谞讬讗 诪谞讬谉 砖诇讗 讬讛讗 讚讘专 拽讜讚诐 诇诪讻谞住讬诐 砖谞讗诪专 壮讜诪讻谞住讬 讘讚 讬讛讬讜 注诇 讘砖专讜壮

And it is taught in a baraita: From where is it derived that nothing precedes the donning of the trousers when the priest dresses? As it is stated: 鈥淗e shall wear a sacred tunic of linen; and trousers of linen shall be on his flesh鈥 (Leviticus 16:4). This indicates that the trousers come first, as they are worn directly on the flesh, proving that the list in the mishna is not in accordance with the order in which the priests dressed.

讜转谞讗 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讗拽讚诪讬讛 诇讻转讜谞转 诪砖讜诐 讚讗拽讚诪讬讛 拽专讗 讜拽专讗 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讗拽讚诪讬讛 诪砖讜诐 讚诪讻住讬讗 讻讜诇讛 讙讜驻讬讛 注讚讬驻讗 诇讬讛

The Gemara asks: But if so, what is the reason the tanna mentions the tunic first? The Gemara answers: Because the verse mentions it first. The Gemara asks: And what is the reason the verse mentions it first? The Gemara answers: Because it covers his entire body, the Torah prefers to mention it first.

住拽讬诇讛 砖专讬驻讛 讻讜壮 住拽讬诇讛 讞诪讜专讛 诪砖专讬驻讛 砖讻谉 谞讬转谞讛 诇诪讙讚祝 讜诇注讜讘讚 注讘讜讚讛 讝专讛 诪讗讬 讞讜诪专讗 砖讻谉 驻讜砖讟 讬讚讜 讘注讬拽专

搂 The mishna states the types of the death penalty in descending order of severity: Stoning, burning, killing by decapitation, and strangulation. The Gemara discusses the basis for this order. Stoning is considered more severe than burning, as stoning is meted out to one who blasphemes, i.e., one who curses God, and to one who worships idols. For what reason is the severity of these transgressions considered greater than others? Because the transgressor undermines the fundamental tenets of Judaism.

讗讚专讘讛 砖专讬驻讛 讞诪讜专讛 砖讻谉 谞讬转谞讛 诇讘转 讻讛谉 砖讝讬谞转讛 讜诪讗讬 讞讜诪专讗 砖讻谉 诪讞诇诇转 讗转 讗讘讬讛

The Gemara raises an objection: On the contrary; burning is more severe than stoning, as it is meted out to a priest鈥檚 daughter who committed adultery (see Leviticus 21:9). And for what reason is the severity of this transgression considered greater than others? Because through her sin she profanes not only herself but her father as well.

Scroll To Top