Commentary for Avodah Zarah 103:22
חדא מגו חדא קמיבעיא ליה טומאה דרבנן מי הדרא או לא הדרא את"ל לא הדרא טומאה דעבודת כוכבים משום חומרא דעבודת כוכבים מי שויוה רבנן כטומאה דאורייתא או לא תיקו
He was asking two questions: Does rabbinical impurity return or not? And if you decide that it does not return, do the rabbis make impurity caused by idolatry, on account of its severity, equal to biblical impurity or not? The question remains unanswered.
Daf Shevui to Avodah Zarah
The midrash above says that Deuteronomy 12:2 is referring to vessels—human-made objects. The problem is that the verse explicitly says “places” not “vessels.” The Talmud explains that we cannot take this word “places” at face value for we have another midrash on the same verse (one we saw above) that says that places (“mountains”) cannot be prohibited. Since it cannot mean that Jews must destroy places where idolatry took place, it must mean that Jews cannot use “vessels” that were used in idolatrous worship.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Daf Shevui to Avodah Zarah
Now the problem with the above midrash is that it interprets the verse to refer to “vessels”—things used in the worship ceremony, but then it goes on to use this as a source for a rule about idols. Vessels and idols are not the same thing. The Talmud defends this analogy with another midrash—gods (idols) are compared to vessels—neither become prohibited until they are worshipped or used in a worship service.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Daf Shevui to Avodah Zarah
Why doesn’t R. Akiva make this comparison between vessels and idols? He says that the word את interrupts the connection between vessels and idols. So while vessels may be prohibited only once they have been used, idols made by idolaters can be prohibited immediately, which is his position as we saw in the mishnah.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Daf Shevui to Avodah Zarah
Last week we saw a midrash which explained why R. Ishmael holds that the idol of an idolater is prohibited only once it is worshipped. But what about the second half of his statement—that an idol made by a Jew is prohibited immediately.
The Talmud seems to think that this is just common sense. Below we will examine the other possibilities as to when this idol becomes prohibited. It’s not really common sense but rather process of elimination.
The Talmud seems to think that this is just common sense. Below we will examine the other possibilities as to when this idol becomes prohibited. It’s not really common sense but rather process of elimination.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Daf Shevui to Avodah Zarah
Since we know (from elsewhere) that an idol made by a Jew must be disposed of (it requires geniza) we cannot say that it may be permitted.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Daf Shevui to Avodah Zarah
The verse referring to the making of the golden calf proves that as soon as the Jews made the calf they were considered sinners, even before they had worshipped it.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Daf Shevui to Avodah Zarah
The verse from Deuteronomy 9 about the golden calf might say only that the person is guilty of sin, not that the idol is prohibited. The Talmud then brings another verse to show that a Jew is cursed for making an idol before he even worships it. But this too does not seem to prove that the idol is prohibited immediately, only that the person who makes it is cursed.
To finally solve the issue, the Talmud quotes the next word of the verse—the idol is an abomination as soon as it is made. It need not be worshipped.
Akiva, who holds that an idol made by a Jew is not prohibited until it is worshipped, would hold that the idol itself is not an abomination. But making it leads to the abomination of worshipping it.
To finally solve the issue, the Talmud quotes the next word of the verse—the idol is an abomination as soon as it is made. It need not be worshipped.
Akiva, who holds that an idol made by a Jew is not prohibited until it is worshipped, would hold that the idol itself is not an abomination. But making it leads to the abomination of worshipping it.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Daf Shevui to Avodah Zarah
Akiva derives the idea that idols made by idolaters become prohibited immediately from a verse that calls them “graven images.” They are prohibited as soon as they are made.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Daf Shevui to Avodah Zarah
1. Ishmael would use this verse for a different derashah. The word for graven is “pesilei” and the word for disqualify is “posel.” So R. Ishmael makes a wordplay—how do we know that a non-Jew can annul or disqualify an idol? From the wordplay on this verse.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Daf Shevui to Avodah Zarah
In its totality the verse reads, “You shall consign the images of their gods to the fire; you shall not covet the silver and gold on them and keep it for yourselves.” Clearly one is not supposed to keep the silver and gold for oneself. But Shmuel makes a midrash on the verse, reading the second half in isolation, and concluding that sometimes one can keep the silver and gold for oneself. When the idolater makes the idol it becomes prohibited and “you shall not covet it.” But when he annuls it, it is permitted and “you shall keep it for yourselves.”
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Daf Shevui to Avodah Zarah
Rav Judah uses a verse from Deuteronomy 27 to prove that R. Akiva holds that idols made by Jews are not prohibited until they are actually worshipped.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Daf Shevui to Avodah Zarah
Yishmael would use the same verse to prove a different rule. An idol made by an Israelite can never be annulled. It must be buried or in some other way removed from sight. “He places it in secret” alludes not to the Jew’s worship of the idol (which is the original meaning of the verse), but to the mandate to remove it from sight.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Daf Shevui to Avodah Zarah
Akiva derives the rule about removing idolatry belonging to an Israelite from a different verse. The Torah seems to make a puzzling comparison between an asherah tree and the altar. R. Hisda learns from here that just as the stones of the altar (when it needs to be replaced) must be removed (they must be placed in the geniza), so too idols made by a Jew must also be removed. Interestingly we see that a geniza is word used for both the holiest of objects, the altar, and the most profane of objects, an idol. Both are things that we are supposed to not make use of, at least not in our regular lives.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Daf Shevui to Avodah Zarah
Yishmael would use this verse as did R. Shimon b. Lakish, who based his midrash on the juxtaposition of the verses in Deuteronomy 16. Appointing an unworthy judge is like planting an idolatrous tree. Appointing such a judge in a place where there are sages is like planting such a tree next to the altar itself.
We can see here that some later sages seem to understand idolatry as synonymous with corruption and lawlessness. This is an understanding of what is wrong with idolatry that may have resonated more with sages who lived in a world where idolatry had lost some of its muster. It certainly appealed very strongly to post-Talmudic sages.
We can see here that some later sages seem to understand idolatry as synonymous with corruption and lawlessness. This is an understanding of what is wrong with idolatry that may have resonated more with sages who lived in a world where idolatry had lost some of its muster. It certainly appealed very strongly to post-Talmudic sages.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Daf Shevui to Avodah Zarah
A vessel used in idol worship was broken and someone (we’ll discuss who later on) welded it to repair it. Does the very act of welding it cause it to become prohibited? In other words, when does this simple vessel become something considered part of idolatrous service and therefore prohibited?
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Daf Shevui to Avodah Zarah
The Talmud now analyzes whose idols these vessels were used in serving. If the idols belonged to an idolater, then there is no question that they are not prohibited until they are actually used. This is because everyone holds that accessories used in idolatrous worship are not inherently prohibited just by being made. Take for instance an incense pan. Such an accessory is not prohibited until it is actually worshipped.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Daf Shevui to Avodah Zarah
We now raise the possibility that the idol belonged to a Jew. But the question cannot be according to R. Akiva, for R. Akiva holds that even the idol is not prohibited until it is worshipped. Obviously an accessory is not prohibited until it is used.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Daf Shevui to Avodah Zarah
The Talmud finally arrives at what the question really is. R. Yishmael holds that an idol made by an Israelite is prohibited immediately. So if we derive the rule regarding this accessory from the idol itself, it too should be prohibited immediately. Alternatively, we might say that it is like accessories to idols owned by non-Jews. Just as those accessories are prohibited only once they are used, so too this accessory is prohibited only once it is used.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Daf Shevui to Avodah Zarah
Why does R. Hamnuna ask about a vessel that was repaired? Why not ask about a vessel made to be used in idol worship? The answer is that he is really referencing the idea that comes up in a mishnah (Kelim 11:1). Metal vessels are subject to impurity. If they are broken they become pure but if they are repaired they automatically resume their previous impurity. This mishnah refers to normal types of impurity, those found in the Torah (such as contact with the dead, a sheretz or a person with skin disease). But does the same apply to the rabbinic impurity accorded to idols? Does the vessel, previously used in idol worship, immediately become prohibited when it is repaired?
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Daf Shevui to Avodah Zarah
If R. Hamnuna was asking about rabbinic impurity, why did he ask about this specific form, impurity that comes from an idol? Why not ask about other forms of impurity considered to be of only rabbinic status such as the impurity conveyed to vessels by liquids?
The answer is that R. Hamnuna was asking a question and a follow-up question. 1) Does rabbinic impurity return when a metal vessel is repaired, the way that biblical impurity does? 2) If we answer that it does not, is the impurity that the rabbis accord to idols the same as other rabbinic forms of impurity? Or is the rule more stringent here because of the severity with which idolatry is treated.
After all that work trying to figure out what R. Hamnuna was asking, there is no answer. I bet you could have seen that one coming a mile away.
The answer is that R. Hamnuna was asking a question and a follow-up question. 1) Does rabbinic impurity return when a metal vessel is repaired, the way that biblical impurity does? 2) If we answer that it does not, is the impurity that the rabbis accord to idols the same as other rabbinic forms of impurity? Or is the rule more stringent here because of the severity with which idolatry is treated.
After all that work trying to figure out what R. Hamnuna was asking, there is no answer. I bet you could have seen that one coming a mile away.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Daf Shevui to Avodah Zarah
When the non-Jew annuls his idol, do the foods offered to it become pure or do they retain their impurity?
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Daf Shevui to Avodah Zarah
Yohanan did not need to ask about vessels. Since they can be purified in the mikveh, they are also purified when the idol is annulled. But food cannot be purified in a mikveh. So does it become pure when the idol is annulled?
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Daf Shevui to Avodah Zarah
If the food is itself worshipped, for instance idolaters bow down to a four-pack of really good beer (hmm, now why would I think of that), there is no question that when the food is annulled as an idol, it becomes pure.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy