Commentary for Kiddushin 46:3

ואלא הא דאמר רב הונא בריה דרב יהושע הני כהני שלוחי דרחמנא נינהו דאי סלקא דעתך שלוחי דידן נינהו מי איכא מידי דאנן לא מצינן עבדינן ואינהו מצי עבדי

appoint an agent either! After propounding, he solved it himself: We deduce 'lah', 'lah', from a [married] woman, [hence] he is as a married woman. If so, when R'Huna son of R'Joshua said: These priests are agents of the All-Merciful One, for should you think they are ours, is there aught which we ourselves may not do while they may do [it on our behalf]?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Ned. 35b. The question is: When a priest offers a sacrifice on behalf of an Israelite, does he act as his agent or as God's? The practical difference is where an Israelite vows to derive no benefit from a certain priest: on the first alternative, the priest may not offer his sacrifices for him; on the second, he may.');"><sup>5</sup></span>

Daf Shevui to Kiddushin

Elsewhere R. Huna son of R. Joshua says that priests serving in the Temple are agents of God and not agents of the people whose sacrifices they are offering. They cannot be our agents because an agent should not be able to do something that the person sending him cannot do himself. But now we do have a case of an agent being able to do something that the person himself cannot do. A slave’s agent can accept the slave’s deed of manumission, whereas the slave himself cannot.
Thus we have a difficulty on R. Huna.

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Previous Verse Full Chapter Next Verse