A final statement of Rabbi Yochanan quoting Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov is regarding the rabbinic ordinance that one who is within four cubits of a dead person is considered impure as it is likely one may have put one’s hand over the dead body without realizing. However, an exception is made in the courtyard of a burial cave as there is a separation between the courtyard and the burial area, assuming it is a certain minimum size. Beit Hillel holds that the size needed is only 4×4 handbreadths. However, this size needed depends on how one enters the courtyard of the cave – from above or from the side. The same types of drashot that were taught regarding the house and the vineyard are taught regarding the betrothal of a woman – what cases are included and which are excluded and where is it derived from the verses? From the order in the Torah of house, vineyard, wife, they derive that first one should build a house, then plant a vineyard and only after that, find a wife and get married. A verse from Proverbs 24:27 is brought to teach the same idea, however, there are several different ways to extrapolate that verse – perhaps referring to order of learning (Torah, then Mishna then Talmud) or learning that will then lead to good deeds. More details regarding the exemption from war for those just married are explained and connected to verses. The Mishna discusses the third speech that is given to the people before going out to war, sending home those who are soft-hearted. Who is considered soft-hearted? There are a number of different opinions. What are the practical differences between them? There were officers who stood in the front and in the back of the nation to ensure that no one try to run away from war, as running away is demoralizing and leads to defeat. Which type of war are these exemptions for? All wars? Just optional wars? There is a debate between Rabbi Yehuda and the tana kama and the Gemara explains the difference between them. The new chapter deals with the egla arufa ceremony. If one finds a dead body and they don’t know who killed the person, judges from the central Sanhedrin (of 71 judges) come and measure to find the closest city. How many judges? Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Shimon disagree about whether it is five or three. from where in the verses do they each derive their opinion? The body must be found on the ground and not buried under something or hanging from a tree or floating in the water. The ceremony must be performed in Hebrew – from where is this derived?
Want to dedicate learning? Get started here:
Today’s daily daf tools:
Sotah 44
מֵת תּוֹפֵס אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת לְטוּמְאָה. וְתַנָּא תּוּנָא: חֲצַר הַקֶּבֶר, הָעוֹמֵד בְּתוֹכָהּ — טָהוֹר, וְהוּא שֶׁיְּהוּ בָּהּ אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת, דִּבְרֵי בֵּית שַׁמַּאי. בֵּית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים: אַרְבָּעָה טְפָחִים. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים — שֶׁפִּתְחָהּ מִלְּמַעְלָה, אֲבָל פִּתְחָהּ מִן הַצַּד — דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת.
A corpse occupies four cubits with regard to impurity, as the Sages decreed that one becomes impure when he stands within four cubits of a corpse. This measure protects priests and others who are forbidden to contract ritual impurity imparted by a corpse, so that they do not inadvertently become impure. And the tanna of the mishna taught in another mishna as well (Oholot 15:8): With regard to a courtyard adjacent to a grave, one who stands within it is ritually pure, provided that there are four cubits by four cubits within it. A courtyard this size constitutes its own space, according to the statement of Beit Shammai. Beit Hillel say: A space of four handbreadths by four handbreadths is enough. In what case is this statement said? Four handbreadths suffice when the entrance to the courtyard is from above. In such a case there is no concern that one will cover the grave with his body, and thereby become ritually impure, when entering the courtyard. However, if its entrance is from the side, everyone agrees the courtyard must be at least four cubits by four cubits in size.
כְּלַפֵּי לְיָיא?! אַדְּרַבָּה: מִן הַצַּד — מִידְּרִיד וְנָפֵיק, מִלְּמַעְלָה — אִי אֶפְשָׁר דְּלָא מַאֲהִיל. אֶלָּא: בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים שֶׁפִּתְחָהּ מִן הַצַּד, אֲבָל פִּתְחָהּ מִלְּמַעְלָה, אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת. וְהָנֵי מִילֵּי, חֲצַר הַקֶּבֶר דִּמְסַיְּימָא מְחִיצָתַהּ, אֲבָל מֵת בְּעָלְמָא — תָּפֵיס.
The Gemara challenges the preceding resolution: In which direction [kelapei layya] is there a distinction between the positions of the entrance? On the contrary, if one enters from the side, he can slip away and exit without becoming impure. However, if one enters from above it is impossible that he will not overlie the grave over the course of climbing in and out of the courtyard. Rather, it should say: In what case is this statement of Beit Hillel, according to which four handbreadths by four handbreadths are enough, said? It is when the entrance is from the side. However, if the entrance is from above, then the courtyard must be at least four cubits by four cubits according to all opinions. The Gemara further qualifies: And this statement applies in a courtyard adjacent to a grave whose partitions are delineated, but if there is only a corpse lying about without any enclosures, it certainly occupies and affects a surrounding area of four cubits.
״מִי הָאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר אֵרַשׂ אִשָּׁה כּוּ׳״, תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״אֲשֶׁר אֵרַס״, אֶחָד הַמְאָרֵס אֶת הַבְּתוּלָה, וְאֶחָד הַמְאָרֵס אֶת הָאַלְמָנָה, וְאֶחָד שׁוֹמֶרֶת יָבָם. וַאֲפִילּוּ חֲמִשָּׁה אַחִין, וּמֵת אֶחָד מֵהֶם בַּמִּלְחָמָה — כּוּלָּן חוֹזְרִין. ״לֹא לָקַח״, ״וְלֹא לְקָחָהּ״ — פְּרָט לְאַלְמָנָה לַכֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל, גְּרוּשָׁה וַחֲלוּצָה לְכֹהֵן הֶדְיוֹט, מַמְזֶרֶת וּנְתִינָה לְיִשְׂרָאֵל, בַּת יִשְׂרָאֵל לְמַמְזֵר וּלְנָתִין.
§ The mishna teaches among the statements that were said before battle: “What man is there that has betrothed a wife and has not taken her? Let him go and return to his house” (Deuteronomy 20:7). The Sages taught: “That has betrothed” is referring to one who betroths a virgin, and to one who betroths a widow, and to one whose yevama is a widow awaiting her yavam, i.e., this man in the military ranks, to perform levirate marriage. And even if there are five brothers, and one of them dies in the war, they all return for the widow. In addition, the verse could have singled out one who has not taken a wife. When the verse specifies: “and has not taken her,” this excludes men in forbidden marriages: A widow who is betrothed to a High Priest; either a divorcée or a yevama who performed ḥalitza [ḥalutza], who is betrothed to a common priest; a mamzeret or a Gibeonite woman who is betrothed to an Israelite; or an Israelite woman who is betrothed to a mamzer or to a Gibeonite.
לֵימָא דְּלָא כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי, דְּאִי רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי, הָא אָמַר ״הַיָּרֵא וְרַךְ הַלֵּבָב״ — זֶה הַמִּתְיָירֵא מֵעֲבֵירוֹת שֶׁבְּיָדוֹ?
The Gemara asks: Shall we say that this opinion is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili? As, if it were in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, he says: When the verse singles out “fearful and fainthearted” (Deuteronomy 20:8), this is referring to one who is afraid because of sins that he has. According to this interpretation, one who marries a woman forbidden to him should return home from war because of his guilt, which seems to contradict the opinion mentioned above that such a man does not return from the ranks.
אֲפִילּוּ תֵּימָא רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי, כִּדְרַבָּה. דְּאָמַר רַבָּה: לְעוֹלָם אֵינוֹ חַיָּיב עַד שֶׁיִּבְעוֹל, מָה טַעַם: ״לֹא יִקָּח״ מִשּׁוּם ״לֹא יְחַלֵּל״ — מִשּׁוּם הָכִי אֵינוֹ לוֹקֶה עַד שֶׁיִּבְעוֹל.
The Gemara answers: Even if you say that the ruling is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, such a man does not return, in accordance with the opinion of Rabba. As Rabba said: A man is never liable for a forbidden marriage until he engages in sexual intercourse with his wife. With regard to the forbidden marriages of a High Priest, the Torah states: “A widow, or a divorcée, or a profaned woman, or a harlot, these he shall not take…And he shall not profane his seed among his people” (Leviticus 21:14–15). What is the reason that “he shall not take” one of these women as a wife? It is due to: “He shall not profane his seed” by engaging in sexual intercourse. Due to that reason, he is not flogged until he engages in sexual intercourse with a woman who is forbidden to him. Therefore, even according to Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, one who merely betroths a forbidden wife might not return home from the ranks.
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״אֲשֶׁר בָּנָה״, ״אֲשֶׁר נָטַע״, ״אֲשֶׁר אֵרַשׂ״, לִימְּדָה תּוֹרָה דֶּרֶךְ אֶרֶץ: שֶׁיִּבְנֶה אָדָם בַּיִת, וְיִטַּע כֶּרֶם, וְאַחַר כָּךְ יִשָּׂא אִשָּׁה. וְאַף שְׁלֹמֹה אָמַר בְּחׇכְמָתוֹ: ״הָכֵן בַּחוּץ מְלַאכְתֶּךָ וְעַתְּדָהּ בַּשָּׂדֶה לָךְ אַחַר וּבָנִיתָ בֵיתֶךָ״. ״הָכֵן בַּחוּץ מְלַאכְתֶּךָ״ — זֶה בַּיִת, ״וְעַתְּדָהּ בַּשָּׂדֶה לָךְ״ — זֶה כֶּרֶם, ״אַחַר וּבָנִיתָ בֵיתֶךָ״ — זוֹ אִשָּׁה.
§ The Sages taught (Tosefta 7:20-21): The Torah states: “What man is there that has built” (Deuteronomy 20:5), and then “that has planted” (Deuteronomy 20:6), and finally “that has betrothed” (Deuteronomy 20:7). The Torah has taught a person the desired mode of behavior: A person should build a house, then plant a vineyard, and afterward marry a woman. And even King Solomon said in his wisdom: “Prepare your work outside, and make it fit for yourself in the field; and afterward build your house” (Proverbs 24:27). The Sages explained: “Prepare your work outside”; this is a house. “And make it fit for yourself in the field”; this is a vineyard. “And afterward you shall build your house”; this is a wife.
דָּבָר אַחֵר: ״הָכֵן בַּחוּץ מְלַאכְתֶּךָ״ — זֶה מִקְרָא, ״וְעַתְּדָהּ בַּשָּׂדֶה לָךְ״ — זֶה מִשְׁנָה, ״אַחַר וּבָנִיתָ בֵיתֶךָ״ — זֶה גְּמָרָא. דָּבָר אַחֵר: ״הָכֵן בַּחוּץ מְלַאכְתֶּךָ״ — זֶה מִקְרָא וּמִשְׁנָה, ״וְעַתְּדָהּ בַּשָּׂדֶה לָךְ״ — זֶה גְּמָרָא, ״אַחַר וּבָנִית בֵיתֶךָ״ — אֵלּוּ מַעֲשִׂים טוֹבִים. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בְּנוֹ שֶׁל רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי אוֹמֵר: ״הָכֵן בַּחוּץ מְלַאכְתֶּךָ״ — זֶה מִקְרָא וּמִשְׁנָה וּגְמָרָא, ״וְעַתְּדָהּ בַּשָּׂדֶה לָךְ״ — אֵלּוּ מַעֲשִׂים טוֹבִים, ״אַחַר וּבָנִיתָ בֵיתֶךָ״ — דְּרוֹשׁ וְקַבֵּל שָׂכָר.
Alternatively, this verse may be understood as relating to Torah study: “Prepare your work outside”; this is the study of Bible. “And make it fit for yourself in the field”; this is the study of Mishna. “Afterward you shall build your house”; this is the study of Gemara, the analysis of and deliberation over the statements of the Sages. Alternatively: “Prepare your work outside”; this is the study of Bible and Mishna. “And make it fit for yourself in the field”; this is the study of Gemara. “Afterward you shall build your house”; these are good deeds. Rabbi Eliezer, son of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, says: “Prepare your work outside”; this is the study of Bible, and Mishna, and Gemara. “And make it fit for yourself in the field”; these are good deeds. “Afterward you shall build your house”; expound upon new understandings of Torah and receive reward, which is possible only after the initial steps.
וְאֵלּוּ שֶׁאֵינָן חוֹזְרִין: הַבּוֹנֶה בֵּית שַׁעַר כּוּ׳. תָּנָא: אִם הוֹסִיף בּוֹ דִּימוֹס אֶחָד — חוֹזֵר. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: אַף הַבּוֹנֶה בֵּית לְבֵנִים בַּשָּׁרוֹן — לֹא הָיָה חוֹזֵר. תָּנָא: מִפְּנֵי שֶׁמְּחַדְּשִׁין אוֹתוֹ פַּעֲמַיִם בְּשָׁבוּעַ.
§ The mishna teaches: And these are the men who do not return from the ranks: One who builds a gateway, or an enclosed veranda, or a balcony…Rabbi Yehuda says: Even one who rebuilds a house as it stood originally would not return. A Sage taught (Tosefta 7:18): If one adds one additional row of stones [dimos] to the original structure, he returns from the ranks. That is enough to render it a new building. The mishna further teaches: Rabbi Eliezer says: Even one who builds a new brick house in the Sharon would not return. A Sage taught: This is because the owners renew it twice in a period of seven years, and it is therefore not considered a permanent structure.
וְאֵלּוּ שֶׁאֵין זָזִין מִמְּקוֹמָן: בָּנָה בַּיִת חָדָשׁ וַחֲנָכוֹ וְכוּ׳. תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״אִשָּׁה חֲדָשָׁה״ — אֵין לִי אֶלָּא אִשָּׁה חֲדָשָׁה, אַלְמָנָה וּגְרוּשָׁה מִנַּיִן — תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״אִשָּׁה״ מִכׇּל מָקוֹם. אִם כֵּן, מָה תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״אִשָּׁה חֲדָשָׁה״? מִי שֶׁחֲדָשָׁה לוֹ, יָצָא מַחֲזִיר גְּרוּשָׁתוֹ שֶׁאֵין חֲדָשָׁה לוֹ.
§ The mishna teaches: These are the men who do not even move from their places: One who built a house and dedicated it within the year; one who planted a vineyard and used its fruit for less than a year; one who marries his betrothed and one who marries his yevama, as it is stated: “When a man takes a new wife, he shall not go out with the army, neither shall he be charged with any business; he shall be free for his house one year, and shall cheer his wife whom he has taken” (Deuteronomy 24:5). With respect to a new husband’s exemption, the Sages taught a number of halakhot from this verse. From the term: “A new wife” I have derived only that a man returns only for a new virgin wife. From where do I derive that it applies to a widow or a divorcée? The verse states: “A wife,” in any case. If so, what is the meaning when the verse states: “A new wife?” It is referring to one who is new for him, excluding one who remarries his divorcée, who is not new to him.
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״לֹא יֵצֵא בַּצָּבָא״. יָכוֹל בַּצָּבָא הוּא דְּלֹא יֵצֵא, אֲבָל יַסְפִּיק מַיִם וּמָזוֹן וִיתַקֵּן הַדְּרָכִים — תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״וְלֹא יַעֲבֹר עָלָיו לְכׇל דָּבָר״. יָכוֹל שֶׁאֲנִי מְרַבֶּה אַף הַבּוֹנֶה בַּיִת וְלֹא חֲנָכוֹ, נָטַע כֶּרֶם וְלֹא חִלְּלוֹ, אֵרַס אִשָּׁה וְלֹא לְקָחָהּ — תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״עָלָיו״ — עָלָיו אִי אַתָּה מַעֲבִיר, אֲבָל אַתָּה מַעֲבִיר עַל אֲחֵרִים. וּמֵאַחַר דִּכְתַב ״לֹא יַעֲבֹר״, ״לֹא יֵצֵא בַּצָּבָא״ לְמָה לִי? לַעֲבוֹר עָלָיו בִּשְׁנֵי לָאוִין.
The Sages taught with regard to the verse: “He shall not go out with the army” (Deuteronomy 24:5); one might have thought it is with the army that he does not go out, but he does go to supply water and food to the army and to repair the roads for them. Therefore, the verse states: “Neither shall he be charged with any business.” One might have thought that I include even one who has built a house and has not dedicated it, or one who has planted a vineyard and has not used its fruit, or one who has betrothed a woman and has not taken her as his wife? The verse states: “Neither shall he be charged with any business”; you do not charge him with any responsibilities, but you do charge others. The Gemara asks: And since the Torah states: “Neither shall he be charged with any business,” why do I need to be taught: “He shall not go out with the army”? The Gemara answers: The Torah adds this clause so that he will violate two prohibitions if he goes out to war: “He shall not go out with the army,” and: “Neither shall he be charged.”
מַתְנִי׳ ״וְיָסְפוּ הַשֹּׁטְרִים לְדַבֵּר אֶל הָעָם וְגוֹ׳״, רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר: ״הַיָּרֵא וְרַךְ הַלֵּבָב״ — כְּמַשְׁמָעוֹ, שֶׁאֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לַעֲמוֹד בְּקִשְׁרֵי הַמִּלְחָמָה וְלִרְאוֹת חֶרֶב שְׁלוּפָה. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי אוֹמֵר: ״הַיָּרֵא וְרַךְ הַלֵּבָב״ — זֶהוּ הַמִּתְיָירֵא מִן הָעֲבֵירוֹת שֶׁבְּיָדוֹ, לְפִיכָךְ תָּלְתָה לוֹ הַתּוֹרָה אֶת כׇּל אֵלּוּ, שֶׁיַּחְזוֹר בִּגְלָלָן.
MISHNA: The mishna continues its discussion of the speech given before battle. “And the officers shall speak further to the people, and they shall say: What man is there that is fearful and fainthearted? Let him go and return unto his house” (Deuteronomy 20:8). Rabbi Akiva says: “That is fearful and fainthearted” is to be understood as it indicates, that the man is unable to stand in the battle ranks and to see a drawn sword because it will terrify him. Rabbi Yosei HaGelili says: “That is fearful and fainthearted”; this is one who is afraid because of the sins that he has; he, too, returns. Therefore, the Torah provided him with all these additional reasons for exemption from the army so he can ascribe his leaving to one of them. In this way, the sinner may leave the ranks without having to publicly acknowledge that he is a sinner.
רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: אַלְמָנָה לְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל, גְּרוּשָׁה וַחֲלוּצָה לְכֹהֵן הֶדְיוֹט, מַמְזֶרֶת וּנְתִינָה לְיִשְׂרָאֵל, בַּת יִשְׂרָאֵל לְמַמְזֵר וּלְנָתִין — הֲרֵי הוּא הַיָּרֵא וְרַךְ הַלֵּבָב.
Rabbi Yosei says: With regard to one who has betrothed a woman forbidden to him, including a widow betrothed to a High Priest; a divorcée or a yevama who performed ḥalitza [ḥalutza] betrothed to a common priest; a mamzeret or a Gibeonite woman betrothed to an Israelite; or a daughter of an Israelite betrothed to a mamzer or a Gibeonite; this man is he whom the verse calls “fearful and fainthearted.” He fears that his sin will jeopardize his safety in the war.
״וְהָיָה כְּכַלֹּת הַשֹּׁטְרִים לְדַבֵּר אֶל הָעָם וּפָקְדוּ שָׂרֵי צְבָאוֹת בְּרֹאשׁ הָעָם״. וּבַעֲקֵיבוֹ שֶׁל עָם מַעֲמִידִין זְקִיפִין לִפְנֵיהֶם, וַאֲחֵרִים מֵאֲחוֹרֵיהֶם, וְכַשִּׁילִין שֶׁל בַּרְזֶל בִּידֵיהֶן, וְכׇל הַמְבַקֵּשׁ לַחְזוֹר — הָרְשׁוּת בְּיָדוֹ לְקַפֵּחַ אֶת שׁוֹקָיו.
The mishna continues its discussion. The verse states: “And it shall be, when the officers conclude speaking to the people, that captains of legions shall be appointed at the head of the people” (Deuteronomy 20:9). The mishna adds: As well as at the rear of the people. The officers station guards [zekifin] in front of them, and other guards behind them, and they have iron rods [kashilin] in their hands. And with regard to anyone who attempts to turn back and flee from the war, the guard has license to beat [lekape’aḥ] his legs
שֶׁתְּחִילַּת נִיסָה נְפִילָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״נָס יִשְׂרָאֵל לִפְנֵי פְלִשְׁתִּים וְגַם מַגֵּפָה גְדוֹלָה הָיְתָה בָעָם״, וּלְהַלָּן הוּא אוֹמֵר: ״וַיָּנֻסוּ אַנְשֵׁי יִשְׂרָאֵל מִפְּנֵי פְלִשְׁתִּים וַיִּפְּלוּ חֲלָלִים וְגוֹ׳״.
because the beginning of fleeing is a downfall on the battlefield, as it is stated: “Israel has fled before the Philistines, and there has been also a great slaughter among the people” (I Samuel 4:17), and likewise it says further on: “And the men of Israel fled from before the Philistines, and fell down slain in Mount Gilboa” (I Samuel 31:1).
בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים — בְּמִלְחֲמוֹת הָרְשׁוּת, אֲבָל בְּמִלְחֲמוֹת מִצְוָה — הַכֹּל יוֹצְאִין, אֲפִילּוּ חָתָן מֵחֶדְרוֹ וְכַלָּה מֵחוּפָּתָהּ. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה: בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים — בְּמִלְחֲמוֹת מִצְוָה, אֲבָל בְּמִלְחֲמוֹת חוֹבָה — הַכֹּל יוֹצְאִין, אֲפִילּוּ חָתָן מֵחֶדְרוֹ וְכַלָּה מֵחוּפָּתָהּ.
The mishna adds: In what case are all of these statements, with regard to the various exemptions from war, said? They are said with regard to elective wars. But in wars whose mandate is a mitzva, everyone goes, even a groom from his room and a bride from her wedding canopy. Rabbi Yehuda said: In what case are all of these statements, with regard to the various exemptions from war, said? They are said with regard to wars whose mandate is a mitzva. But in obligatory wars, everyone goes, even a groom from his room and a bride from her wedding canopy.
גְּמָ׳ מַאי אִיכָּא בֵּין רַבִּי יוֹסֵי לְרַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי? אִיכָּא בֵּינַיְיהוּ עֲבֵירָה דְּרַבָּנַן.
GEMARA: The Gemara asks: With regard to their understanding that the “fearful and fainthearted” is referring to one harboring sins, what difference is there between the opinion of Rabbi Yosei and the opinion of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili? The Gemara answers: There is a practical difference between them with regard to a sin which violates a prohibition by rabbinic law. According to Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, one who has violated a rabbinic law returns home, whereas Rabbi Yosei maintains that one returns home only if he has violated a Torah law, as in the case of a priest who has married a divorcée.
כְּמַאן אָזְלָא הָא דְּתַנְיָא: שָׂח בֵּין תְּפִילָּה לִתְפִילָּה — עֲבֵירָה הִיא בְּיָדוֹ, וְחוֹזֵר עָלֶיהָ מֵעוֹרְכֵי הַמִּלְחָמָה. כְּמַאן — כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי.
The Gemara asks: In accordance with whose opinion is that which is taught in a baraita: If one spoke between donning the phylactery of the arm and the phylactery of the head, he has a sin on his hands, and due to that sin he returns from the ranks of soldiers waging war. In accordance with whose opinion does this man return? It is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, who maintains that one returns even due to a minor transgression.
מַאן תְּנָא לְהָא דְּתָנוּ רַבָּנַן: שָׁמַע קוֹל קְרָנוֹת וְהִרְתִּיעַ, הַגָּפַת תְּרִיסִין וְהִרְתִּיעַ, צִחְצוּחַ חֲרָבוֹת וּמַיִם שׁוֹתְתִין לוֹ עַל בִּרְכָּיו — חוֹזֵר. כְּמַאן — לֵימָא רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא הִיא וְלָא רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי? בְּהָא אֲפִילּוּ רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי מוֹדֶה, מִשּׁוּם דִּכְתִיב: ״וְלֹא יִמַּס אֶת לְבַב אֶחָיו כִּלְבָבוֹ״.
The Gemara asks: Who is the tanna who taught this halakha that the Sages taught in a baraita: If one heard the sound of trumpets and trembled; or he heard the knocking of shields and he trembled; or he heard the sharpening of swords, and urine was trickling down his knees in fear, he returns from the battlefront. In accordance with whose opinion is this? Shall we say that it is the opinion of Rabbi Akiva, who interprets “fearful and fainthearted” literally, and it is not the opinion of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili? The Gemara answers: In this case even Rabbi Yosei HaGelili would concede that he should return, because it is written: “What man is there that is fearful and fainthearted? Let him go and return…lest his brethren’s heart melt as his heart” (Deuteronomy 20:8). Someone so clearly frightened invariably spreads his fear to those around him.
״וְהָיָה כְּכַלֹּת הַשֹּׁטְרִים כּוּ׳״. הַאי מִפְּנֵי שֶׁתְּחִילַּת נִיסָה נְפִילָה, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁתְּחִילַּת נְפִילָה נִיסָה מִבְּעֵי לֵיהּ! אֵימָא מִפְּנֵי שֶׁתְּחִילַּת נְפִילָה נִיסָה.
§ The mishna teaches: “And it shall be, when the officers conclude speaking to the people, that captains of legions shall be appointed at the head of the people” (Deuteronomy 20:9), and that the guards have the license to beat the legs of anyone who attempts to turn back and flee from the war, because the beginning of fleeing is a downfall. The Gemara is puzzled by the language of the mishna: This phrase: Because the beginning of fleeing is a downfall, appears to be backward. The mishna should have said the opposite: Because the beginning of the downfall is the act of fleeing. The Gemara concedes: Indeed, say that the mishna means: Because the beginning of the downfall is the act of fleeing.
בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים בְּמִלְחֲמוֹת הָרְשׁוּת כּוּ׳, אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: רְשׁוּת דְּרַבָּנַן זוֹ הִיא מִצְוָה דְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה, מִצְוָה דְּרַבָּנַן זוֹ הִיא חוֹבָה דְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה.
The mishna teaches: In what case are these statements said? They are said with regard to elective wars, as opposed to obligatory wars or wars whose mandate is a mitzva. Rabbi Yoḥanan says concerning the various categories of war: The elective war referenced by the Rabbis is the same as a war whose mandate is a mitzva referenced by Rabbi Yehuda, and the war that is a mitzva mentioned by the Rabbis is the same as the obligatory war mentioned by Rabbi Yehuda. Therefore, Rabbi Yehuda is merely stating that the wars which the Rabbis call elective are to be seen as mandated by a mitzva.
אָמַר רָבָא: מִלְחֲמוֹת יְהוֹשֻׁעַ לְכַבֵּשׁ — דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל חוֹבָה, מִלְחֲמוֹת בֵּית דָּוִד לִרְוָוחָה — דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל רְשׁוּת. כִּי פְּלִיגִי לְמַעוֹטֵי נׇכְרִים דְּלָא לַיְתֵי עֲלַיְיהוּ. מָר קָרֵי לַהּ מִצְוָה וּמָר קָרֵי רְשׁוּת. נָפְקָא מִינַּהּ לְעוֹסֵק בְּמִצְוָה שֶׁפָּטוּר מִן הַמִּצְוָה.
Rava said: With respect to the wars that Joshua waged to conquer Eretz Yisrael, all agree that they were obligatory. With respect to the wars waged by the House of King David for the sake of territorial expansion, all agree that they were elective wars. When they disagree, it is with regard to preventative wars that are waged to reduce the gentiles so that they will not come and wage war against them. One Sage, Rabbi Yehuda, called this type of war a mitzva, and one Sage, the Rabbis, called it an elective war. There is a practical difference between these opinions with respect to the principle: One who is engaged in a mitzva is exempt from performing another mitzva. According to Rabbi Yehuda, one fighting in this kind of war is exempt from performing another mitzva.
הֲדַרַן עֲלָךְ מְשׁוּחַ מִלְחָמָה
עֶגְלָה עֲרוּפָה בִּלְשׁוֹן הַקּוֹדֶשׁ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״כִּי יִמָּצֵא חָלָל בָּאֲדָמָה … וְיָצְאוּ זְקֵנֶיךָ וְשֹׁפְטֶיךָ״. שְׁלֹשָׁה מִבֵּית דִּין הַגָּדוֹל שֶׁבִּירוּשָׁלַיִם הָיוּ יוֹצְאִין, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: חֲמִשָּׁה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר ״זְקֵנֶיךָ״ — שְׁנַיִם, ״וְשֹׁפְטֶיךָ״ — שְׁנַיִם, וְאֵין בֵּית דִּין שָׁקוּל, מוֹסִיפִין עֲלֵיהֶן עוֹד אֶחָד.
MISHNA: In certain cases of unsolved murder, the Torah prescribes a ritual performed with a heifer whose neck is broken. During the course of this ritual, the judges say a confession in the sacred tongue, Hebrew, as it is stated in the verse: “If one be found slain in the land which the Lord your God has given you to possess it, lying in the field, and it is not known who has smitten him; then your Elders and your judges shall come forth” (Deuteronomy 21:1–2). What is the procedure for this ritual? Three members of the High Court [Sanhedrin] that is in Jerusalem would go out to see the corpse. Rabbi Yehuda says: Five would go out, as it is stated: “Your Elders,” in the plural form, indicating at least two; and it is written: “And your judges,” in the plural form, indicating another two judges; and a court may not be comprised of an even number of judges because they need to be able to issue a majority ruling. Consequently, they add to them one more Elder.
נִמְצָא טָמוּן בַּגַּל אוֹ תָּלוּי בָּאִילָן אוֹ צָף עַל פְּנֵי הַמַּיִם — לֹא הָיוּ עוֹרְפִין, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״בָּאֲדָמָה״ — וְלֹא טָמוּן בַּגַּל, ״נֹפֵל״ — וְלֹא תָּלוּי בָּאִילָן, ״בַּשָּׂדֶה״ — וְלֹא צָף עַל פְּנֵי הַמַּיִם.
If the corpse was found concealed in a pile of stones, or hanging on a tree, or floating on the surface of the water, then the judges would not break the neck of the heifer, as it is stated: “If one be found slain in the land” (Deuteronomy 21:1), and not concealed in a pile of stones; “lying” on the ground and not hanging on a tree; “in the field,” and not floating on the surface of the water.
נִמְצָא סָמוּךְ לַסְּפָר אוֹ לְעִיר שֶׁרוּבָּהּ נׇכְרִים אוֹ לְעִיר שֶׁאֵין בָּהּ בֵּית דִּין — לֹא הָיוּ עוֹרְפִין. אֵין מוֹדְדִין אֶלָּא לְעִיר שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּהּ בֵּית דִּין.
If a corpse was found close to the border of the country, or close to a city in which the majority of its inhabitants are gentiles, or close to a city that is without a rabbinical court of twenty-three judges, then the judges would not break the heifer’s neck. Additionally, the Elders measure the distance from the corpse only to a city that has a rabbinical court with twenty-three judges.
גְּמָ׳ מַאי קָאָמַר? אָמַר רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ, הָכִי קָאָמַר: שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר ״וְעָנוּ וְאָמְרוּ״, וּלְהַלָּן הוּא אוֹמֵר ״וְעָנוּ הַלְוִיִּם וְאָמְרוּ וְגוֹ׳״, מָה עֲנִיָּיה הָאֲמוּרָה לְהַלָּן בִּלְשׁוֹן הַקּוֹדֶשׁ — אַף כָּאן בִּלְשׁוֹן הַקּוֹדֶשׁ.
GEMARA: The Gemara asks: What is the first sentence in the mishna saying? The mishna is attempting to prove that the verses read during the ritual of breaking a heifer’s neck are to be recited in Hebrew, yet the verse does not offer any proof of this. Rabbi Abbahu said that this is what the mishna is saying: The confession is recited in Hebrew, as it is stated with regard to the ritual of the heifer whose neck is broken: “And they shall speak and say” (Deuteronomy 21:7), and later it is stated with regard to the curses stated on Mount Ebal: “And the Levities shall speak and say” (Deuteronomy 27:14). Just as the word “speak” that is said later with regard to the Levites is referring to a speech that is recited in the sacred tongue, so too here the declaration is recited in the sacred tongue.
וְסֵדֶר עֶגְלָה עֲרוּפָה כֵּיצַד — ״כִּי יִמָּצֵא חָלָל בָּאֲדָמָה … וְיָצְאוּ זְקֵנֶיךָ וְשֹׁפְטֶיךָ״ — שְׁלֹשָׁה מִבֵּית דִּין הַגָּדוֹל שֶׁבִּירוּשָׁלַיִם הָיוּ יוֹצְאִין. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר חֲמִשָּׁה וְכוּ׳.
The mishna continues to answer the question of: And how is the ritual of the heifer whose neck is broken ordered? The mishna states: It is written in the Torah: “If one be found slain in the land which the Lord your God has given you to possess it, lying in the field, and it is not known who has smitten him; then your Elders and your judges shall come forth, and they shall measure unto the cities which are round about him that is slain” (Deuteronomy 21:1–2). Three members of the High Court that is in Jerusalem would go forth. Rabbi Yehuda says: Five.
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״וְיָצְאוּ זְקֵנֶיךָ וְשֹׁפְטֶיךָ״. ״זְקֵנֶיךָ״ — שְׁנַיִם, ״וְשֹׁפְטֶיךָ״ — שְׁנַיִם, וְאֵין בֵּית דִּין שָׁקוּל, מוֹסִיפִין עֲלֵיהֶן עוֹד אֶחָד, הֲרֵי כָּאן חֲמִשָּׁה. דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: ״זְקֵנֶיךָ״ — שְׁנַיִם, וְאֵין בֵּית דִּין שָׁקוּל, מוֹסִיפִין עֲלֵיהֶן עוֹד אֶחָד, הֲרֵי כָּאן שְׁלֹשָׁה.
The Sages taught: “And your Elders and judges shall come forth.” “Your Elders” indicates two; “and your judges” also indicates two; and a court may not be composed of an even number of judges, so they add to them one more judge. Therefore, there are five judges. This is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Shimon says: “Your Elders” indicates two, and as a court may not consist of an even number of judges they add to them one more. Therefore, there are three.
וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן נָמֵי, הָא כְּתִיב ״וְשֹׁפְטֶיךָ״! הָהוּא מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ לִמְיוּחָדִין שֶׁבְּשׁוֹפְטֶיךָ. וְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה: מִ״זִּקְנֵי״ ״זְקֵנֶיךָ״ נָפְקָא.
The Gemara asks: But according to Rabbi Shimon as well, isn’t it written: “And your judges”; why does he not agree that this indicates a need for two more judges? The Gemara answers: He requires that additional word “Elders” in order to teach that they must be the distinguished among your judges, i.e., judges from the Sanhedrin. And how does Rabbi Yehuda, who derives from the phrase “and your judges” that there is a need for two additional judges, know that they need to be from the Sanhedrin? He derives it from an extra letter. The verse could have simply stated: The Elders. Instead, it adds a letter and states: “Your Elders,” to teach that they must be the distinguished among the Elders of Israel.
וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן: אִי כְּתַב רַחֲמָנָא ״זִקְנֵי״ — הֲוָה אָמֵינָא אֲפִילּוּ זִקְנֵי הַשּׁוּק, כְּתַב רַחֲמָנָא ״זְקֵנֶיךָ״. וְאִי כְּתַב רַחֲמָנָא ״זְקֵנֶיךָ״ — הֲוָה אָמֵינָא אֲפִילּוּ סַנְהֶדְרִי קְטַנָּה, כְּתַב רַחֲמָנָא ״וְשֹׁפְטֶיךָ״ — לִמְיוּחָדִין שֶׁבְּשׁוֹפְטֶיךָ.
And Rabbi Shimon could say: If the Merciful One had written in the Torah: The Elders, I would say that it includes even the Elders of the marketplace, meaning any honorable people. Therefore, the Merciful One writes in the Torah: “Your Elders,” to indicate specifically Torah Sages, who are revered by all. And if the Merciful One had written in the Torah only: “Your Elders,” I would say that it includes even Elders from a lesser Sanhedrin. Therefore, the Merciful One also writes: “And your judges,” to teach that they must be the distinguished among your judges, from the Great Sanhedrin.
וְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה גְּמַר ״זִקְנֵי״ ״זִקְנֵי״ מִ״זִּקְנֵי הָעֵדָה״: מָה לְהַלָּן מְיוּחָדִין שֶׁבָּעֵדָה — אַף כָּאן מְיוּחָדִין שֶׁבָּעֵדָה.
And what is the source of Rabbi Yehuda that the judges may not come from a lesser Sanhedrin? He derives this halakha from a verbal analogy between “Elders,” written here, and “Elders,” written with regard to the offering that the Sanhedrin brings when the nation has sinned as a result of a mistaken ruling. This offering is brought by “the Elders of the congregation” (Leviticus 4:15). Just as there, “the Elders of the congregation” are the distinguished among the congregation, from the Great Sanhedrin, so too, here the verse is referring to the distinguished among the congregation.
אִי גָּמַר, לִגְמְרַהּ לְכוּלַּהּ מִילְּתָא מֵהָתָם, ״זְקֵנֶיךָ וְשֹׁפְטֶיךָ״ לְמָה לִי? אֶלָּא, וָיו ״וְשֹׁפְטֶיךָ״ לְמִנְיָנָא. וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן —
The Gemara asks: If he derives this halakha from this verbal analogy, then he should derive the entire matter from there, including the requirement for five judges. If so, why do I need the phrase “your Elders and your judges”? Rather, it must be that Rabbi Yehuda does not derive the halakha from this verbal analogy. Instead, he understands that the phrase “your Elders” indicates two, and that “your judges” indicates that they must be the distinguished among your judges, and the letter vav in the phrase “and your judges [veshofetekha]” is to add two more to the count of the judges. And Rabbi Shimon does not accept this derivation
Today’s daily daf tools:
Delve Deeper
Broaden your understanding of the topics on this daf with classes and podcasts from top women Talmud scholars.
New to Talmud?
Check out our resources designed to help you navigate a page of Talmud – and study at the pace, level and style that fits you.
The Hadran Women’s Tapestry
Meet the diverse women learning Gemara at Hadran and hear their stories.
I started learning Gemara at the Yeshivah of Flatbush. And I resumed ‘ברוך ה decades later with Rabbanit Michele at Hadran. I started from Brachot and have had an exciting, rewarding experience throughout seder Moed!
Maale Adumim, Israel
See video
Raanana, Israel
I started learning at the beginning of this cycle more than 2 years ago, and I have not missed a day or a daf. It’s been challenging and enlightening and even mind-numbing at times, but the learning and the shared experience have all been worth it. If you are open to it, there’s no telling what might come into your life.
Phoenix, Arizona, United States
When I began learning Daf Yomi at the beginning of the current cycle, I was preparing for an upcoming surgery and thought that learning the Daf would be something positive I could do each day during my recovery, even if I accomplished nothing else. I had no idea what a lifeline learning the Daf would turn out to be in so many ways.
Lexington, MA, United States
It happened without intent (so am I yotzei?!) – I watched the women’s siyum live and was so moved by it that the next morning, I tuned in to Rabbanit Michelle’s shiur, and here I am, still learning every day, over 2 years later. Some days it all goes over my head, but others I grasp onto an idea or a story, and I ‘get it’ and that’s the best feeling in the world. So proud to be a Hadran learner.
Zichron Yaakov, Israel
After experiences over the years of asking to join gemara shiurim for men and either being refused by the maggid shiur or being the only women there, sometimes behind a mechitza, I found out about Hadran sometime during the tail end of Masechet Shabbat, I think. Life has been much better since then.
London, United Kingdom
Ive been learning Gmara since 5th grade and always loved it. Have always wanted to do Daf Yomi and now with Michelle Farber’s online classes it made it much easier to do! Really enjoying the experience thank you!!
Neve Daniel, Israel
In January 2020, my chevruta suggested that we “up our game. Let’s do Daf Yomi” – and she sent me the Hadran link. I lost my job (and went freelance), there was a pandemic, and I am still opening the podcast with my breakfast coffee, or after Shabbat with popcorn. My Aramaic is improving. I will need a new bookcase, though.
Atlanta, Georgia, United States
I had dreamed of doing daf yomi since I had my first serious Talmud class 18 years ago at Pardes with Rahel Berkovitz, and then a couple of summers with Leah Rosenthal. There is no way I would be able to do it without another wonderful teacher, Michelle, and the Hadran organization. I wake up and am excited to start each day with the next daf.
Irvine, United States
Tel Aviv, Israel
I went to day school in Toronto but really began to learn when I attended Brovenders back in the early 1980’s. Last year after talking to my sister who was learning Daf Yomi, inspired, I looked on the computer and the Hadran site came up. I have been listening to each days shiur in the morning as I work. I emphasis listening since I am not sitting with a Gamara. I listen while I work in my studio.
Tekoa, Israel
Having never learned Talmud before, I started Daf Yomi in hopes of connecting to the Rabbinic tradition, sharing a daily idea on Instagram (@dafyomiadventures). With Hadran and Sefaria, I slowly gained confidence in my skills and understanding. Now, part of the Pardes Jewish Educators Program, I can’t wait to bring this love of learning with me as I continue to pass it on to my future students.
Pennsylvania, United States
After being so inspired by the siyum shas two years ago, I began tentatively learning daf yomi, like Rabbanut Michelle kept saying – taking one daf at a time. I’m still taking it one daf at a time, one masechet at a time, but I’m loving it and am still so inspired by Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran community, and yes – I am proud to be finishing Seder Mo’ed.
Bet Shemesh, Israel
In January 2020 on a Shabbaton to Baltimore I heard about the new cycle of Daf Yomi after the siyum celebration in NYC stadium. I started to read “ a daily dose of Talmud “ and really enjoyed it . It led me to google “ do Orthodox women study Talmud? “ and found HADRAN! Since then I listen to the podcast every morning, participate in classes and siyum. I love to learn, this is amazing! Thank you
Atlanta, United States
After enthusing to my friend Ruth Kahan about how much I had enjoyed remote Jewish learning during the earlier part of the pandemic, she challenged me to join her in learning the daf yomi cycle. I had always wanted to do daf yomi but now had no excuse. The beginning was particularly hard as I had never studied Talmud but has become easier, as I have gained some familiarity with it.
Brookline, United States
I started to listen to Michelle’s podcasts four years ago. The minute I started I was hooked. I’m so excited to learn the entire Talmud, and think I will continue always. I chose the quote “while a woman is engaged in conversation she also holds the spindle”. (Megillah 14b). It reminds me of all of the amazing women I learn with every day who multi-task, think ahead and accomplish so much.
Zichron Yakov, Israel
Geri Goldstein got me started learning daf yomi when I was in Israel 2 years ago. It’s been a challenge and I’ve learned a lot though I’m sure I miss a lot. I quilt as I listen and I want to share what I’ve been working on.
Ottawa, Canada
I am a Reform rabbi and took Talmud courses in rabbinical school, but I knew there was so much more to learn. It felt inauthentic to serve as a rabbi without having read the entire Talmud, so when the opportunity arose to start Daf Yomi in 2020, I dove in! Thanks to Hadran, Daf Yomi has enriched my understanding of rabbinic Judaism and deepened my love of Jewish text & tradition. Todah rabbah!
California, United States
Studying has changed my life view on הלכה and יהדות and time. It has taught me bonudaries of the human nature and honesty of our sages in their discourse to try and build a nation of caring people .
Kfar Saba, Israel
I started learning on January 5, 2020. When I complete the 7+ year cycle I will be 70 years old. I had been intimidated by those who said that I needed to study Talmud in a traditional way with a chevruta, but I decided the learning was more important to me than the method. Thankful for Daf Yomi for Women helping me catch up when I fall behind, and also being able to celebrate with each Siyum!
Bakersfield, United States
Sotah 44
מֵת תּוֹפֵס אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת לְטוּמְאָה. וְתַנָּא תּוּנָא: חֲצַר הַקֶּבֶר, הָעוֹמֵד בְּתוֹכָהּ — טָהוֹר, וְהוּא שֶׁיְּהוּ בָּהּ אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת, דִּבְרֵי בֵּית שַׁמַּאי. בֵּית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים: אַרְבָּעָה טְפָחִים. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים — שֶׁפִּתְחָהּ מִלְּמַעְלָה, אֲבָל פִּתְחָהּ מִן הַצַּד — דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת.
A corpse occupies four cubits with regard to impurity, as the Sages decreed that one becomes impure when he stands within four cubits of a corpse. This measure protects priests and others who are forbidden to contract ritual impurity imparted by a corpse, so that they do not inadvertently become impure. And the tanna of the mishna taught in another mishna as well (Oholot 15:8): With regard to a courtyard adjacent to a grave, one who stands within it is ritually pure, provided that there are four cubits by four cubits within it. A courtyard this size constitutes its own space, according to the statement of Beit Shammai. Beit Hillel say: A space of four handbreadths by four handbreadths is enough. In what case is this statement said? Four handbreadths suffice when the entrance to the courtyard is from above. In such a case there is no concern that one will cover the grave with his body, and thereby become ritually impure, when entering the courtyard. However, if its entrance is from the side, everyone agrees the courtyard must be at least four cubits by four cubits in size.
כְּלַפֵּי לְיָיא?! אַדְּרַבָּה: מִן הַצַּד — מִידְּרִיד וְנָפֵיק, מִלְּמַעְלָה — אִי אֶפְשָׁר דְּלָא מַאֲהִיל. אֶלָּא: בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים שֶׁפִּתְחָהּ מִן הַצַּד, אֲבָל פִּתְחָהּ מִלְּמַעְלָה, אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת. וְהָנֵי מִילֵּי, חֲצַר הַקֶּבֶר דִּמְסַיְּימָא מְחִיצָתַהּ, אֲבָל מֵת בְּעָלְמָא — תָּפֵיס.
The Gemara challenges the preceding resolution: In which direction [kelapei layya] is there a distinction between the positions of the entrance? On the contrary, if one enters from the side, he can slip away and exit without becoming impure. However, if one enters from above it is impossible that he will not overlie the grave over the course of climbing in and out of the courtyard. Rather, it should say: In what case is this statement of Beit Hillel, according to which four handbreadths by four handbreadths are enough, said? It is when the entrance is from the side. However, if the entrance is from above, then the courtyard must be at least four cubits by four cubits according to all opinions. The Gemara further qualifies: And this statement applies in a courtyard adjacent to a grave whose partitions are delineated, but if there is only a corpse lying about without any enclosures, it certainly occupies and affects a surrounding area of four cubits.
״מִי הָאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר אֵרַשׂ אִשָּׁה כּוּ׳״, תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״אֲשֶׁר אֵרַס״, אֶחָד הַמְאָרֵס אֶת הַבְּתוּלָה, וְאֶחָד הַמְאָרֵס אֶת הָאַלְמָנָה, וְאֶחָד שׁוֹמֶרֶת יָבָם. וַאֲפִילּוּ חֲמִשָּׁה אַחִין, וּמֵת אֶחָד מֵהֶם בַּמִּלְחָמָה — כּוּלָּן חוֹזְרִין. ״לֹא לָקַח״, ״וְלֹא לְקָחָהּ״ — פְּרָט לְאַלְמָנָה לַכֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל, גְּרוּשָׁה וַחֲלוּצָה לְכֹהֵן הֶדְיוֹט, מַמְזֶרֶת וּנְתִינָה לְיִשְׂרָאֵל, בַּת יִשְׂרָאֵל לְמַמְזֵר וּלְנָתִין.
§ The mishna teaches among the statements that were said before battle: “What man is there that has betrothed a wife and has not taken her? Let him go and return to his house” (Deuteronomy 20:7). The Sages taught: “That has betrothed” is referring to one who betroths a virgin, and to one who betroths a widow, and to one whose yevama is a widow awaiting her yavam, i.e., this man in the military ranks, to perform levirate marriage. And even if there are five brothers, and one of them dies in the war, they all return for the widow. In addition, the verse could have singled out one who has not taken a wife. When the verse specifies: “and has not taken her,” this excludes men in forbidden marriages: A widow who is betrothed to a High Priest; either a divorcée or a yevama who performed ḥalitza [ḥalutza], who is betrothed to a common priest; a mamzeret or a Gibeonite woman who is betrothed to an Israelite; or an Israelite woman who is betrothed to a mamzer or to a Gibeonite.
לֵימָא דְּלָא כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי, דְּאִי רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי, הָא אָמַר ״הַיָּרֵא וְרַךְ הַלֵּבָב״ — זֶה הַמִּתְיָירֵא מֵעֲבֵירוֹת שֶׁבְּיָדוֹ?
The Gemara asks: Shall we say that this opinion is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili? As, if it were in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, he says: When the verse singles out “fearful and fainthearted” (Deuteronomy 20:8), this is referring to one who is afraid because of sins that he has. According to this interpretation, one who marries a woman forbidden to him should return home from war because of his guilt, which seems to contradict the opinion mentioned above that such a man does not return from the ranks.
אֲפִילּוּ תֵּימָא רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי, כִּדְרַבָּה. דְּאָמַר רַבָּה: לְעוֹלָם אֵינוֹ חַיָּיב עַד שֶׁיִּבְעוֹל, מָה טַעַם: ״לֹא יִקָּח״ מִשּׁוּם ״לֹא יְחַלֵּל״ — מִשּׁוּם הָכִי אֵינוֹ לוֹקֶה עַד שֶׁיִּבְעוֹל.
The Gemara answers: Even if you say that the ruling is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, such a man does not return, in accordance with the opinion of Rabba. As Rabba said: A man is never liable for a forbidden marriage until he engages in sexual intercourse with his wife. With regard to the forbidden marriages of a High Priest, the Torah states: “A widow, or a divorcée, or a profaned woman, or a harlot, these he shall not take…And he shall not profane his seed among his people” (Leviticus 21:14–15). What is the reason that “he shall not take” one of these women as a wife? It is due to: “He shall not profane his seed” by engaging in sexual intercourse. Due to that reason, he is not flogged until he engages in sexual intercourse with a woman who is forbidden to him. Therefore, even according to Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, one who merely betroths a forbidden wife might not return home from the ranks.
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״אֲשֶׁר בָּנָה״, ״אֲשֶׁר נָטַע״, ״אֲשֶׁר אֵרַשׂ״, לִימְּדָה תּוֹרָה דֶּרֶךְ אֶרֶץ: שֶׁיִּבְנֶה אָדָם בַּיִת, וְיִטַּע כֶּרֶם, וְאַחַר כָּךְ יִשָּׂא אִשָּׁה. וְאַף שְׁלֹמֹה אָמַר בְּחׇכְמָתוֹ: ״הָכֵן בַּחוּץ מְלַאכְתֶּךָ וְעַתְּדָהּ בַּשָּׂדֶה לָךְ אַחַר וּבָנִיתָ בֵיתֶךָ״. ״הָכֵן בַּחוּץ מְלַאכְתֶּךָ״ — זֶה בַּיִת, ״וְעַתְּדָהּ בַּשָּׂדֶה לָךְ״ — זֶה כֶּרֶם, ״אַחַר וּבָנִיתָ בֵיתֶךָ״ — זוֹ אִשָּׁה.
§ The Sages taught (Tosefta 7:20-21): The Torah states: “What man is there that has built” (Deuteronomy 20:5), and then “that has planted” (Deuteronomy 20:6), and finally “that has betrothed” (Deuteronomy 20:7). The Torah has taught a person the desired mode of behavior: A person should build a house, then plant a vineyard, and afterward marry a woman. And even King Solomon said in his wisdom: “Prepare your work outside, and make it fit for yourself in the field; and afterward build your house” (Proverbs 24:27). The Sages explained: “Prepare your work outside”; this is a house. “And make it fit for yourself in the field”; this is a vineyard. “And afterward you shall build your house”; this is a wife.
דָּבָר אַחֵר: ״הָכֵן בַּחוּץ מְלַאכְתֶּךָ״ — זֶה מִקְרָא, ״וְעַתְּדָהּ בַּשָּׂדֶה לָךְ״ — זֶה מִשְׁנָה, ״אַחַר וּבָנִיתָ בֵיתֶךָ״ — זֶה גְּמָרָא. דָּבָר אַחֵר: ״הָכֵן בַּחוּץ מְלַאכְתֶּךָ״ — זֶה מִקְרָא וּמִשְׁנָה, ״וְעַתְּדָהּ בַּשָּׂדֶה לָךְ״ — זֶה גְּמָרָא, ״אַחַר וּבָנִית בֵיתֶךָ״ — אֵלּוּ מַעֲשִׂים טוֹבִים. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בְּנוֹ שֶׁל רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי אוֹמֵר: ״הָכֵן בַּחוּץ מְלַאכְתֶּךָ״ — זֶה מִקְרָא וּמִשְׁנָה וּגְמָרָא, ״וְעַתְּדָהּ בַּשָּׂדֶה לָךְ״ — אֵלּוּ מַעֲשִׂים טוֹבִים, ״אַחַר וּבָנִיתָ בֵיתֶךָ״ — דְּרוֹשׁ וְקַבֵּל שָׂכָר.
Alternatively, this verse may be understood as relating to Torah study: “Prepare your work outside”; this is the study of Bible. “And make it fit for yourself in the field”; this is the study of Mishna. “Afterward you shall build your house”; this is the study of Gemara, the analysis of and deliberation over the statements of the Sages. Alternatively: “Prepare your work outside”; this is the study of Bible and Mishna. “And make it fit for yourself in the field”; this is the study of Gemara. “Afterward you shall build your house”; these are good deeds. Rabbi Eliezer, son of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, says: “Prepare your work outside”; this is the study of Bible, and Mishna, and Gemara. “And make it fit for yourself in the field”; these are good deeds. “Afterward you shall build your house”; expound upon new understandings of Torah and receive reward, which is possible only after the initial steps.
וְאֵלּוּ שֶׁאֵינָן חוֹזְרִין: הַבּוֹנֶה בֵּית שַׁעַר כּוּ׳. תָּנָא: אִם הוֹסִיף בּוֹ דִּימוֹס אֶחָד — חוֹזֵר. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: אַף הַבּוֹנֶה בֵּית לְבֵנִים בַּשָּׁרוֹן — לֹא הָיָה חוֹזֵר. תָּנָא: מִפְּנֵי שֶׁמְּחַדְּשִׁין אוֹתוֹ פַּעֲמַיִם בְּשָׁבוּעַ.
§ The mishna teaches: And these are the men who do not return from the ranks: One who builds a gateway, or an enclosed veranda, or a balcony…Rabbi Yehuda says: Even one who rebuilds a house as it stood originally would not return. A Sage taught (Tosefta 7:18): If one adds one additional row of stones [dimos] to the original structure, he returns from the ranks. That is enough to render it a new building. The mishna further teaches: Rabbi Eliezer says: Even one who builds a new brick house in the Sharon would not return. A Sage taught: This is because the owners renew it twice in a period of seven years, and it is therefore not considered a permanent structure.
וְאֵלּוּ שֶׁאֵין זָזִין מִמְּקוֹמָן: בָּנָה בַּיִת חָדָשׁ וַחֲנָכוֹ וְכוּ׳. תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״אִשָּׁה חֲדָשָׁה״ — אֵין לִי אֶלָּא אִשָּׁה חֲדָשָׁה, אַלְמָנָה וּגְרוּשָׁה מִנַּיִן — תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״אִשָּׁה״ מִכׇּל מָקוֹם. אִם כֵּן, מָה תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״אִשָּׁה חֲדָשָׁה״? מִי שֶׁחֲדָשָׁה לוֹ, יָצָא מַחֲזִיר גְּרוּשָׁתוֹ שֶׁאֵין חֲדָשָׁה לוֹ.
§ The mishna teaches: These are the men who do not even move from their places: One who built a house and dedicated it within the year; one who planted a vineyard and used its fruit for less than a year; one who marries his betrothed and one who marries his yevama, as it is stated: “When a man takes a new wife, he shall not go out with the army, neither shall he be charged with any business; he shall be free for his house one year, and shall cheer his wife whom he has taken” (Deuteronomy 24:5). With respect to a new husband’s exemption, the Sages taught a number of halakhot from this verse. From the term: “A new wife” I have derived only that a man returns only for a new virgin wife. From where do I derive that it applies to a widow or a divorcée? The verse states: “A wife,” in any case. If so, what is the meaning when the verse states: “A new wife?” It is referring to one who is new for him, excluding one who remarries his divorcée, who is not new to him.
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״לֹא יֵצֵא בַּצָּבָא״. יָכוֹל בַּצָּבָא הוּא דְּלֹא יֵצֵא, אֲבָל יַסְפִּיק מַיִם וּמָזוֹן וִיתַקֵּן הַדְּרָכִים — תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״וְלֹא יַעֲבֹר עָלָיו לְכׇל דָּבָר״. יָכוֹל שֶׁאֲנִי מְרַבֶּה אַף הַבּוֹנֶה בַּיִת וְלֹא חֲנָכוֹ, נָטַע כֶּרֶם וְלֹא חִלְּלוֹ, אֵרַס אִשָּׁה וְלֹא לְקָחָהּ — תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״עָלָיו״ — עָלָיו אִי אַתָּה מַעֲבִיר, אֲבָל אַתָּה מַעֲבִיר עַל אֲחֵרִים. וּמֵאַחַר דִּכְתַב ״לֹא יַעֲבֹר״, ״לֹא יֵצֵא בַּצָּבָא״ לְמָה לִי? לַעֲבוֹר עָלָיו בִּשְׁנֵי לָאוִין.
The Sages taught with regard to the verse: “He shall not go out with the army” (Deuteronomy 24:5); one might have thought it is with the army that he does not go out, but he does go to supply water and food to the army and to repair the roads for them. Therefore, the verse states: “Neither shall he be charged with any business.” One might have thought that I include even one who has built a house and has not dedicated it, or one who has planted a vineyard and has not used its fruit, or one who has betrothed a woman and has not taken her as his wife? The verse states: “Neither shall he be charged with any business”; you do not charge him with any responsibilities, but you do charge others. The Gemara asks: And since the Torah states: “Neither shall he be charged with any business,” why do I need to be taught: “He shall not go out with the army”? The Gemara answers: The Torah adds this clause so that he will violate two prohibitions if he goes out to war: “He shall not go out with the army,” and: “Neither shall he be charged.”
מַתְנִי׳ ״וְיָסְפוּ הַשֹּׁטְרִים לְדַבֵּר אֶל הָעָם וְגוֹ׳״, רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר: ״הַיָּרֵא וְרַךְ הַלֵּבָב״ — כְּמַשְׁמָעוֹ, שֶׁאֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לַעֲמוֹד בְּקִשְׁרֵי הַמִּלְחָמָה וְלִרְאוֹת חֶרֶב שְׁלוּפָה. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי אוֹמֵר: ״הַיָּרֵא וְרַךְ הַלֵּבָב״ — זֶהוּ הַמִּתְיָירֵא מִן הָעֲבֵירוֹת שֶׁבְּיָדוֹ, לְפִיכָךְ תָּלְתָה לוֹ הַתּוֹרָה אֶת כׇּל אֵלּוּ, שֶׁיַּחְזוֹר בִּגְלָלָן.
MISHNA: The mishna continues its discussion of the speech given before battle. “And the officers shall speak further to the people, and they shall say: What man is there that is fearful and fainthearted? Let him go and return unto his house” (Deuteronomy 20:8). Rabbi Akiva says: “That is fearful and fainthearted” is to be understood as it indicates, that the man is unable to stand in the battle ranks and to see a drawn sword because it will terrify him. Rabbi Yosei HaGelili says: “That is fearful and fainthearted”; this is one who is afraid because of the sins that he has; he, too, returns. Therefore, the Torah provided him with all these additional reasons for exemption from the army so he can ascribe his leaving to one of them. In this way, the sinner may leave the ranks without having to publicly acknowledge that he is a sinner.
רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: אַלְמָנָה לְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל, גְּרוּשָׁה וַחֲלוּצָה לְכֹהֵן הֶדְיוֹט, מַמְזֶרֶת וּנְתִינָה לְיִשְׂרָאֵל, בַּת יִשְׂרָאֵל לְמַמְזֵר וּלְנָתִין — הֲרֵי הוּא הַיָּרֵא וְרַךְ הַלֵּבָב.
Rabbi Yosei says: With regard to one who has betrothed a woman forbidden to him, including a widow betrothed to a High Priest; a divorcée or a yevama who performed ḥalitza [ḥalutza] betrothed to a common priest; a mamzeret or a Gibeonite woman betrothed to an Israelite; or a daughter of an Israelite betrothed to a mamzer or a Gibeonite; this man is he whom the verse calls “fearful and fainthearted.” He fears that his sin will jeopardize his safety in the war.
״וְהָיָה כְּכַלֹּת הַשֹּׁטְרִים לְדַבֵּר אֶל הָעָם וּפָקְדוּ שָׂרֵי צְבָאוֹת בְּרֹאשׁ הָעָם״. וּבַעֲקֵיבוֹ שֶׁל עָם מַעֲמִידִין זְקִיפִין לִפְנֵיהֶם, וַאֲחֵרִים מֵאֲחוֹרֵיהֶם, וְכַשִּׁילִין שֶׁל בַּרְזֶל בִּידֵיהֶן, וְכׇל הַמְבַקֵּשׁ לַחְזוֹר — הָרְשׁוּת בְּיָדוֹ לְקַפֵּחַ אֶת שׁוֹקָיו.
The mishna continues its discussion. The verse states: “And it shall be, when the officers conclude speaking to the people, that captains of legions shall be appointed at the head of the people” (Deuteronomy 20:9). The mishna adds: As well as at the rear of the people. The officers station guards [zekifin] in front of them, and other guards behind them, and they have iron rods [kashilin] in their hands. And with regard to anyone who attempts to turn back and flee from the war, the guard has license to beat [lekape’aḥ] his legs
שֶׁתְּחִילַּת נִיסָה נְפִילָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״נָס יִשְׂרָאֵל לִפְנֵי פְלִשְׁתִּים וְגַם מַגֵּפָה גְדוֹלָה הָיְתָה בָעָם״, וּלְהַלָּן הוּא אוֹמֵר: ״וַיָּנֻסוּ אַנְשֵׁי יִשְׂרָאֵל מִפְּנֵי פְלִשְׁתִּים וַיִּפְּלוּ חֲלָלִים וְגוֹ׳״.
because the beginning of fleeing is a downfall on the battlefield, as it is stated: “Israel has fled before the Philistines, and there has been also a great slaughter among the people” (I Samuel 4:17), and likewise it says further on: “And the men of Israel fled from before the Philistines, and fell down slain in Mount Gilboa” (I Samuel 31:1).
בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים — בְּמִלְחֲמוֹת הָרְשׁוּת, אֲבָל בְּמִלְחֲמוֹת מִצְוָה — הַכֹּל יוֹצְאִין, אֲפִילּוּ חָתָן מֵחֶדְרוֹ וְכַלָּה מֵחוּפָּתָהּ. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה: בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים — בְּמִלְחֲמוֹת מִצְוָה, אֲבָל בְּמִלְחֲמוֹת חוֹבָה — הַכֹּל יוֹצְאִין, אֲפִילּוּ חָתָן מֵחֶדְרוֹ וְכַלָּה מֵחוּפָּתָהּ.
The mishna adds: In what case are all of these statements, with regard to the various exemptions from war, said? They are said with regard to elective wars. But in wars whose mandate is a mitzva, everyone goes, even a groom from his room and a bride from her wedding canopy. Rabbi Yehuda said: In what case are all of these statements, with regard to the various exemptions from war, said? They are said with regard to wars whose mandate is a mitzva. But in obligatory wars, everyone goes, even a groom from his room and a bride from her wedding canopy.
גְּמָ׳ מַאי אִיכָּא בֵּין רַבִּי יוֹסֵי לְרַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי? אִיכָּא בֵּינַיְיהוּ עֲבֵירָה דְּרַבָּנַן.
GEMARA: The Gemara asks: With regard to their understanding that the “fearful and fainthearted” is referring to one harboring sins, what difference is there between the opinion of Rabbi Yosei and the opinion of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili? The Gemara answers: There is a practical difference between them with regard to a sin which violates a prohibition by rabbinic law. According to Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, one who has violated a rabbinic law returns home, whereas Rabbi Yosei maintains that one returns home only if he has violated a Torah law, as in the case of a priest who has married a divorcée.
כְּמַאן אָזְלָא הָא דְּתַנְיָא: שָׂח בֵּין תְּפִילָּה לִתְפִילָּה — עֲבֵירָה הִיא בְּיָדוֹ, וְחוֹזֵר עָלֶיהָ מֵעוֹרְכֵי הַמִּלְחָמָה. כְּמַאן — כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי.
The Gemara asks: In accordance with whose opinion is that which is taught in a baraita: If one spoke between donning the phylactery of the arm and the phylactery of the head, he has a sin on his hands, and due to that sin he returns from the ranks of soldiers waging war. In accordance with whose opinion does this man return? It is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, who maintains that one returns even due to a minor transgression.
מַאן תְּנָא לְהָא דְּתָנוּ רַבָּנַן: שָׁמַע קוֹל קְרָנוֹת וְהִרְתִּיעַ, הַגָּפַת תְּרִיסִין וְהִרְתִּיעַ, צִחְצוּחַ חֲרָבוֹת וּמַיִם שׁוֹתְתִין לוֹ עַל בִּרְכָּיו — חוֹזֵר. כְּמַאן — לֵימָא רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא הִיא וְלָא רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי? בְּהָא אֲפִילּוּ רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי מוֹדֶה, מִשּׁוּם דִּכְתִיב: ״וְלֹא יִמַּס אֶת לְבַב אֶחָיו כִּלְבָבוֹ״.
The Gemara asks: Who is the tanna who taught this halakha that the Sages taught in a baraita: If one heard the sound of trumpets and trembled; or he heard the knocking of shields and he trembled; or he heard the sharpening of swords, and urine was trickling down his knees in fear, he returns from the battlefront. In accordance with whose opinion is this? Shall we say that it is the opinion of Rabbi Akiva, who interprets “fearful and fainthearted” literally, and it is not the opinion of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili? The Gemara answers: In this case even Rabbi Yosei HaGelili would concede that he should return, because it is written: “What man is there that is fearful and fainthearted? Let him go and return…lest his brethren’s heart melt as his heart” (Deuteronomy 20:8). Someone so clearly frightened invariably spreads his fear to those around him.
״וְהָיָה כְּכַלֹּת הַשֹּׁטְרִים כּוּ׳״. הַאי מִפְּנֵי שֶׁתְּחִילַּת נִיסָה נְפִילָה, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁתְּחִילַּת נְפִילָה נִיסָה מִבְּעֵי לֵיהּ! אֵימָא מִפְּנֵי שֶׁתְּחִילַּת נְפִילָה נִיסָה.
§ The mishna teaches: “And it shall be, when the officers conclude speaking to the people, that captains of legions shall be appointed at the head of the people” (Deuteronomy 20:9), and that the guards have the license to beat the legs of anyone who attempts to turn back and flee from the war, because the beginning of fleeing is a downfall. The Gemara is puzzled by the language of the mishna: This phrase: Because the beginning of fleeing is a downfall, appears to be backward. The mishna should have said the opposite: Because the beginning of the downfall is the act of fleeing. The Gemara concedes: Indeed, say that the mishna means: Because the beginning of the downfall is the act of fleeing.
בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים בְּמִלְחֲמוֹת הָרְשׁוּת כּוּ׳, אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: רְשׁוּת דְּרַבָּנַן זוֹ הִיא מִצְוָה דְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה, מִצְוָה דְּרַבָּנַן זוֹ הִיא חוֹבָה דְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה.
The mishna teaches: In what case are these statements said? They are said with regard to elective wars, as opposed to obligatory wars or wars whose mandate is a mitzva. Rabbi Yoḥanan says concerning the various categories of war: The elective war referenced by the Rabbis is the same as a war whose mandate is a mitzva referenced by Rabbi Yehuda, and the war that is a mitzva mentioned by the Rabbis is the same as the obligatory war mentioned by Rabbi Yehuda. Therefore, Rabbi Yehuda is merely stating that the wars which the Rabbis call elective are to be seen as mandated by a mitzva.
אָמַר רָבָא: מִלְחֲמוֹת יְהוֹשֻׁעַ לְכַבֵּשׁ — דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל חוֹבָה, מִלְחֲמוֹת בֵּית דָּוִד לִרְוָוחָה — דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל רְשׁוּת. כִּי פְּלִיגִי לְמַעוֹטֵי נׇכְרִים דְּלָא לַיְתֵי עֲלַיְיהוּ. מָר קָרֵי לַהּ מִצְוָה וּמָר קָרֵי רְשׁוּת. נָפְקָא מִינַּהּ לְעוֹסֵק בְּמִצְוָה שֶׁפָּטוּר מִן הַמִּצְוָה.
Rava said: With respect to the wars that Joshua waged to conquer Eretz Yisrael, all agree that they were obligatory. With respect to the wars waged by the House of King David for the sake of territorial expansion, all agree that they were elective wars. When they disagree, it is with regard to preventative wars that are waged to reduce the gentiles so that they will not come and wage war against them. One Sage, Rabbi Yehuda, called this type of war a mitzva, and one Sage, the Rabbis, called it an elective war. There is a practical difference between these opinions with respect to the principle: One who is engaged in a mitzva is exempt from performing another mitzva. According to Rabbi Yehuda, one fighting in this kind of war is exempt from performing another mitzva.
הֲדַרַן עֲלָךְ מְשׁוּחַ מִלְחָמָה
עֶגְלָה עֲרוּפָה בִּלְשׁוֹן הַקּוֹדֶשׁ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״כִּי יִמָּצֵא חָלָל בָּאֲדָמָה … וְיָצְאוּ זְקֵנֶיךָ וְשֹׁפְטֶיךָ״. שְׁלֹשָׁה מִבֵּית דִּין הַגָּדוֹל שֶׁבִּירוּשָׁלַיִם הָיוּ יוֹצְאִין, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: חֲמִשָּׁה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר ״זְקֵנֶיךָ״ — שְׁנַיִם, ״וְשֹׁפְטֶיךָ״ — שְׁנַיִם, וְאֵין בֵּית דִּין שָׁקוּל, מוֹסִיפִין עֲלֵיהֶן עוֹד אֶחָד.
MISHNA: In certain cases of unsolved murder, the Torah prescribes a ritual performed with a heifer whose neck is broken. During the course of this ritual, the judges say a confession in the sacred tongue, Hebrew, as it is stated in the verse: “If one be found slain in the land which the Lord your God has given you to possess it, lying in the field, and it is not known who has smitten him; then your Elders and your judges shall come forth” (Deuteronomy 21:1–2). What is the procedure for this ritual? Three members of the High Court [Sanhedrin] that is in Jerusalem would go out to see the corpse. Rabbi Yehuda says: Five would go out, as it is stated: “Your Elders,” in the plural form, indicating at least two; and it is written: “And your judges,” in the plural form, indicating another two judges; and a court may not be comprised of an even number of judges because they need to be able to issue a majority ruling. Consequently, they add to them one more Elder.
נִמְצָא טָמוּן בַּגַּל אוֹ תָּלוּי בָּאִילָן אוֹ צָף עַל פְּנֵי הַמַּיִם — לֹא הָיוּ עוֹרְפִין, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״בָּאֲדָמָה״ — וְלֹא טָמוּן בַּגַּל, ״נֹפֵל״ — וְלֹא תָּלוּי בָּאִילָן, ״בַּשָּׂדֶה״ — וְלֹא צָף עַל פְּנֵי הַמַּיִם.
If the corpse was found concealed in a pile of stones, or hanging on a tree, or floating on the surface of the water, then the judges would not break the neck of the heifer, as it is stated: “If one be found slain in the land” (Deuteronomy 21:1), and not concealed in a pile of stones; “lying” on the ground and not hanging on a tree; “in the field,” and not floating on the surface of the water.
נִמְצָא סָמוּךְ לַסְּפָר אוֹ לְעִיר שֶׁרוּבָּהּ נׇכְרִים אוֹ לְעִיר שֶׁאֵין בָּהּ בֵּית דִּין — לֹא הָיוּ עוֹרְפִין. אֵין מוֹדְדִין אֶלָּא לְעִיר שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּהּ בֵּית דִּין.
If a corpse was found close to the border of the country, or close to a city in which the majority of its inhabitants are gentiles, or close to a city that is without a rabbinical court of twenty-three judges, then the judges would not break the heifer’s neck. Additionally, the Elders measure the distance from the corpse only to a city that has a rabbinical court with twenty-three judges.
גְּמָ׳ מַאי קָאָמַר? אָמַר רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ, הָכִי קָאָמַר: שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר ״וְעָנוּ וְאָמְרוּ״, וּלְהַלָּן הוּא אוֹמֵר ״וְעָנוּ הַלְוִיִּם וְאָמְרוּ וְגוֹ׳״, מָה עֲנִיָּיה הָאֲמוּרָה לְהַלָּן בִּלְשׁוֹן הַקּוֹדֶשׁ — אַף כָּאן בִּלְשׁוֹן הַקּוֹדֶשׁ.
GEMARA: The Gemara asks: What is the first sentence in the mishna saying? The mishna is attempting to prove that the verses read during the ritual of breaking a heifer’s neck are to be recited in Hebrew, yet the verse does not offer any proof of this. Rabbi Abbahu said that this is what the mishna is saying: The confession is recited in Hebrew, as it is stated with regard to the ritual of the heifer whose neck is broken: “And they shall speak and say” (Deuteronomy 21:7), and later it is stated with regard to the curses stated on Mount Ebal: “And the Levities shall speak and say” (Deuteronomy 27:14). Just as the word “speak” that is said later with regard to the Levites is referring to a speech that is recited in the sacred tongue, so too here the declaration is recited in the sacred tongue.
וְסֵדֶר עֶגְלָה עֲרוּפָה כֵּיצַד — ״כִּי יִמָּצֵא חָלָל בָּאֲדָמָה … וְיָצְאוּ זְקֵנֶיךָ וְשֹׁפְטֶיךָ״ — שְׁלֹשָׁה מִבֵּית דִּין הַגָּדוֹל שֶׁבִּירוּשָׁלַיִם הָיוּ יוֹצְאִין. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר חֲמִשָּׁה וְכוּ׳.
The mishna continues to answer the question of: And how is the ritual of the heifer whose neck is broken ordered? The mishna states: It is written in the Torah: “If one be found slain in the land which the Lord your God has given you to possess it, lying in the field, and it is not known who has smitten him; then your Elders and your judges shall come forth, and they shall measure unto the cities which are round about him that is slain” (Deuteronomy 21:1–2). Three members of the High Court that is in Jerusalem would go forth. Rabbi Yehuda says: Five.
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״וְיָצְאוּ זְקֵנֶיךָ וְשֹׁפְטֶיךָ״. ״זְקֵנֶיךָ״ — שְׁנַיִם, ״וְשֹׁפְטֶיךָ״ — שְׁנַיִם, וְאֵין בֵּית דִּין שָׁקוּל, מוֹסִיפִין עֲלֵיהֶן עוֹד אֶחָד, הֲרֵי כָּאן חֲמִשָּׁה. דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: ״זְקֵנֶיךָ״ — שְׁנַיִם, וְאֵין בֵּית דִּין שָׁקוּל, מוֹסִיפִין עֲלֵיהֶן עוֹד אֶחָד, הֲרֵי כָּאן שְׁלֹשָׁה.
The Sages taught: “And your Elders and judges shall come forth.” “Your Elders” indicates two; “and your judges” also indicates two; and a court may not be composed of an even number of judges, so they add to them one more judge. Therefore, there are five judges. This is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Shimon says: “Your Elders” indicates two, and as a court may not consist of an even number of judges they add to them one more. Therefore, there are three.
וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן נָמֵי, הָא כְּתִיב ״וְשֹׁפְטֶיךָ״! הָהוּא מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ לִמְיוּחָדִין שֶׁבְּשׁוֹפְטֶיךָ. וְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה: מִ״זִּקְנֵי״ ״זְקֵנֶיךָ״ נָפְקָא.
The Gemara asks: But according to Rabbi Shimon as well, isn’t it written: “And your judges”; why does he not agree that this indicates a need for two more judges? The Gemara answers: He requires that additional word “Elders” in order to teach that they must be the distinguished among your judges, i.e., judges from the Sanhedrin. And how does Rabbi Yehuda, who derives from the phrase “and your judges” that there is a need for two additional judges, know that they need to be from the Sanhedrin? He derives it from an extra letter. The verse could have simply stated: The Elders. Instead, it adds a letter and states: “Your Elders,” to teach that they must be the distinguished among the Elders of Israel.
וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן: אִי כְּתַב רַחֲמָנָא ״זִקְנֵי״ — הֲוָה אָמֵינָא אֲפִילּוּ זִקְנֵי הַשּׁוּק, כְּתַב רַחֲמָנָא ״זְקֵנֶיךָ״. וְאִי כְּתַב רַחֲמָנָא ״זְקֵנֶיךָ״ — הֲוָה אָמֵינָא אֲפִילּוּ סַנְהֶדְרִי קְטַנָּה, כְּתַב רַחֲמָנָא ״וְשֹׁפְטֶיךָ״ — לִמְיוּחָדִין שֶׁבְּשׁוֹפְטֶיךָ.
And Rabbi Shimon could say: If the Merciful One had written in the Torah: The Elders, I would say that it includes even the Elders of the marketplace, meaning any honorable people. Therefore, the Merciful One writes in the Torah: “Your Elders,” to indicate specifically Torah Sages, who are revered by all. And if the Merciful One had written in the Torah only: “Your Elders,” I would say that it includes even Elders from a lesser Sanhedrin. Therefore, the Merciful One also writes: “And your judges,” to teach that they must be the distinguished among your judges, from the Great Sanhedrin.
וְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה גְּמַר ״זִקְנֵי״ ״זִקְנֵי״ מִ״זִּקְנֵי הָעֵדָה״: מָה לְהַלָּן מְיוּחָדִין שֶׁבָּעֵדָה — אַף כָּאן מְיוּחָדִין שֶׁבָּעֵדָה.
And what is the source of Rabbi Yehuda that the judges may not come from a lesser Sanhedrin? He derives this halakha from a verbal analogy between “Elders,” written here, and “Elders,” written with regard to the offering that the Sanhedrin brings when the nation has sinned as a result of a mistaken ruling. This offering is brought by “the Elders of the congregation” (Leviticus 4:15). Just as there, “the Elders of the congregation” are the distinguished among the congregation, from the Great Sanhedrin, so too, here the verse is referring to the distinguished among the congregation.
אִי גָּמַר, לִגְמְרַהּ לְכוּלַּהּ מִילְּתָא מֵהָתָם, ״זְקֵנֶיךָ וְשֹׁפְטֶיךָ״ לְמָה לִי? אֶלָּא, וָיו ״וְשֹׁפְטֶיךָ״ לְמִנְיָנָא. וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן —
The Gemara asks: If he derives this halakha from this verbal analogy, then he should derive the entire matter from there, including the requirement for five judges. If so, why do I need the phrase “your Elders and your judges”? Rather, it must be that Rabbi Yehuda does not derive the halakha from this verbal analogy. Instead, he understands that the phrase “your Elders” indicates two, and that “your judges” indicates that they must be the distinguished among your judges, and the letter vav in the phrase “and your judges [veshofetekha]” is to add two more to the count of the judges. And Rabbi Shimon does not accept this derivation
