דתניא ושאר כל חייבי מיתות שבתורה אין מכמינין עליהן חוץ מזו
but he cannot see them. Then the person he wished to seduce says to him, 'Tell me privately what thou hast proposed to me'; and he does so. Then he remonstrates; 'But how shall we forsake our God in Heaven, and serve idols'? If he retracts, it is well. But if he answers: 'It is our duty and seemly for us', the witnesses who were listening outside bring him to the <i>Beth din</i>, and <font>have him stoned</font>.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the uncensored
editions of the Talmud there follows this
important passage (supplied from D.S. on the authority of the Munich and
Oxford Mss. and
the older editions) 'And this they did to Ben
Stada in Lydda ([H]), and they hung him
on the eve of Passover. Ben Stada was Ben Padira. R. Hisda said: 'The husband was Stada,
the paramour Pandira. But was nor the husband Pappos b. Judah? — His
mother's name
was Stada. But his mother was Miriam, a
dresser of woman's hair? ([H] megaddela neshayia): — As they
say in Pumbaditha, This woman has turned away
([H]) from her husband, (i.e.,
committed adultery).' T. Herford, in 'Christianity in the Talmud',
pp. 37 seqq, 344
seqq, identifies this Ben Stada with Jesus of
Nazareth. As to the meaning of the name, he
connects it with [G] 'seditious', and
suggests (p. 345 n. 1) that it originally denoted 'that Egyptian' (Acts XXI 38, Josephus, Ant. XX, 8,
6) who claimed to be a prophet and led his
followers to the Mount of Olives, where he was routed by the Procurator Felix, and
that in later times he might have been confused with Jeshua ha-Notzri. This hypothesis,
however, involves the disregard of the Talmudic data, for Pappos b. Judah lived a century
after Jesus (Git. 90a), though the mother's name,
Miriam (Mary), would raise no difficulty, as [H] megaddela neshayia may be the result of a
confusion with Mary Magdalene (v. also Box, The Virgin Birth of Jesus, pp. 201f,
for other possible meanings of Ben Stada and Ben Pandira) Derenbourg (Essai note 9,
pp. 465-471) rightly denies the identity of Ben
Stada with Jesus, and regards him simply as a false prophet executed during the
second century at Lydda.
');"><sup>12</sup></span>
Sefer HaChinukh
The laws of the commandment are, for example, that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Sanhedrin 67a), [that] how is the matter of the seduction of the seducer? For example, one who says to his fellow, "Let us go and worship idolatry x," or "Let us go and sacrifice," or "Let us go and burn incense," or "Let us go and pour a libation," or "Let us go and bow down"; or if he said to his fellow in the singular form, "I will go and worship, I will go and sacrifice," or "I will burn incense, I will pour a libation, I will bow down" - whether it is in the singular form or whether it is in the plural form - behold, this is called a seducer. And even though no act was one, such that they did not worship idolatry - not the seducer and not the seduced - nonetheless, their sentence is like that of a seducer because of speech alone. And [also] that which they said (Sanhedrin 67a) [about] one who seduces two, they are his witnesses, and they bring him to court and we stone him upon their [testimony]. And [also] that which they said (Sanhedrin 80b) that a seducer does not require a warning because of the severity of the matter, as it is an evil thing - and so did they, may their memory be blessed, say (Ketuvot 33a) about plotting witnesses, that they not require a warning due to their great evil, and as we will write with God's help in the Order of Shoftim (Sefer HaChinukh 523). And [also] that which they said (Sanhedrin 67a) [about] one who seduces one, that the seduced is obligated to say to him, "I have fellows that want from this, say it to them also"; and that this is done so that two will testify against him and he will be sentenced by a court. And they, may their memory be blessed, said further that if he does not want to seduce two, it is a commandment to conceal witnesses for him. And the matter is that he hides witnesses in a place that they will see the seducer and he will not see them, and [then] he enters with him into things that he said to him in isolation. And [then] the seduced answers him, "How can we leave our God in the heavens and serve wood and stones?" And if the seducer recants or is quiet, he is exempted. But if he says to him, "So is it fitting to do and so is it proper for us," those witnesses bring him to court. And with no other death penalty besides this do we conceal witnesses for them. And this whole matter is to distance idolatry. And they, may their memory be blessed, said (Sifrei Devarim 89:8) that it is a commandment in the hand of the seduced himself to kill him after the court has sentenced him; and about this is it stated (Deuteronomy 13:10), "your hand shall be upon him first to put him to death." And this commandment to kill him is part of the commandment, and we should not consider it as a [separate] commandment on its own. [These] and its other details are in Tractate Sanhedrin.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Sefer HaChinukh
The laws of the commandment are, for example, that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Sanhedrin 67a), [that] how is the matter of the seduction of the seducer? For example, one who says to his fellow, "Let us go and worship idolatry x," or "Let us go and sacrifice," or "Let us go and burn incense," or "Let us go and pour a libation," or "Let us go and bow down"; or if he said to his fellow in the singular form, "I will go and worship, I will go and sacrifice," or "I will burn incense, I will pour a libation, I will bow down" - whether it is in the singular form or whether it is in the plural form - behold, this is called a seducer. And even though no act was one, such that they did not worship idolatry - not the seducer and not the seduced - nonetheless, their sentence is like that of a seducer because of speech alone. And [also] that which they said (Sanhedrin 67a) [about] one who seduces two, they are his witnesses, and they bring him to court and we stone him upon their [testimony]. And [also] that which they said (Sanhedrin 80b) that a seducer does not require a warning because of the severity of the matter, as it is an evil thing - and so did they, may their memory be blessed, say (Ketuvot 33a) about plotting witnesses, that they not require a warning due to their great evil, and as we will write with God's help in the Order of Shoftim (Sefer HaChinukh 523). And [also] that which they said (Sanhedrin 67a) [about] one who seduces one, that the seduced is obligated to say to him, "I have fellows that want from this, say it to them also"; and that this is done so that two will testify against him and he will be sentenced by a court. And they, may their memory be blessed, said further that if he does not want to seduce two, it is a commandment to conceal witnesses for him. And the matter is that he hides witnesses in a place that they will see the seducer and he will not see them, and [then] he enters with him into things that he said to him in isolation. And [then] the seduced answers him, "How can we leave our God in the heavens and serve wood and stones?" And if the seducer recants or is quiet, he is exempted. But if he says to him, "So is it fitting to do and so is it proper for us," those witnesses bring him to court. And with no other death penalty besides this do we conceal witnesses for them. And this whole matter is to distance idolatry. And they, may their memory be blessed, said (Sifrei Devarim 89:8) that it is a commandment in the hand of the seduced himself to kill him after the court has sentenced him; and about this is it stated (Deuteronomy 13:10), "your hand shall be upon him first to put him to death." And this commandment to kill him is part of the commandment, and we should not consider it as a [separate] commandment on its own. [These] and its other details are in Tractate Sanhedrin.
