Sanhedrin 179

Chapter 179

א מחלוקת בעוקר הגוף דעבודת כוכבים וקיום מקצת וביטול מקצת דעבודת כוכבים דרחמנא אמר (דברים יג, ו) מן הדרך אפילו מקצת הדרך
1 They<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Simeon and the Rabbis, whether the seducing prophet is stoned or strangled. ');"><sup>1</sup></span> differ only in respect of one who uproots the fundamental [prohibition] of idolatry,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Stating in the name of God that idolatry is permissible, or even meritorious, as it is written&nbsp;… saying, let us go after other gods. Deut. XIII, 3. ');"><sup>2</sup></span>
ב אבל עוקר הגוף דשאר מצות דברי הכל בחנק וקיום מקצת וביטול מקצת דבשאר מצות דברי הכל פטור
2 or who partially confirms and partially annuls [the prohibition] of idolatry,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. infra. ');"><sup>3</sup></span> since the Divine Law said, […to seduce thee] from [min] the way [which the Lord thy God commanded thee to walk in],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. 6. ');"><sup>4</sup></span>
ג מתיב רב המנונא (דברים יג, ו) ללכת זו מצות עשה בה זו מצות לא תעשה ואי סלקא דעתך בעבודת כוכבים עשה בעבודת כוכבים היכי משכחת לה תרגמה רב חסדא (דברים יב, ג) ונתצתם
3 implying even part of the way.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since min ([H]), is partitive and denotes limitation. The verses adduced by the Rabbis and R. Simeon refer to these cases. ');"><sup>5</sup></span> But if one [a false prophet] fundamentally uproots any other precept,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' E.g., stating as a Divine communication that the Sabbath was no longer to be kept holy. ');"><sup>6</sup></span>
ד רב המנונא אמר מחלוקת בעוקר הגוף בין בעבודת כוכבים בין בשאר מצות וקיום מקצת וביטול מקצת דעבודת כוכבים דרחמנא אמר מן הדרך אפילו מקצת הדרך
4 all agree that he is strangled;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because this is prohibited in Deut. XVIII, 20: But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak&nbsp;… shall die. Unspecified death means strangulation. ');"><sup>7</sup></span> whilst if he partially annuls and partially confirms any other precept, all agree that he is exempt.
ה אבל קיום מקצת וביטול מקצת דבשאר מצות דברי הכל פטור
5 R. Hamnuna objected; [It has been taught] [<i>Because he hath spoken…to seduce thee from the way which the Lord thy God commanded thee] to walk</i>; this refers to positive commands;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'To walk' implies to do, not to abstain from doing. ');"><sup>8</sup></span> <i>therein [bah]</i>: to negative commands.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is deduced in the Sifre by gezerah shawah. ');"><sup>9</sup></span>
ו ת"ר המתנבא לעקור דבר מן התורה חייב לקיים מקצת ולבטל מקצת ר"ש פוטר ובעבודת כוכבים אפילו אומר היום עיבדוה ולמחר בטלוה דברי הכל חייב
6 But should you say that this refers to idolatry, — how is a positive command conceivable in respect of idolatry? — R. Hisda explained it [as referring to], And ye shall overthrow their altars.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. XII, 3. ');"><sup>10</sup></span> R. Hamnuna said; They<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 597, n. 7. ');"><sup>11</sup></span>
ז אביי סבר לה כרב חסדא ומתרץ לה כרב חסדא רבא סבר לה כרב המנונא ומתרץ לה כרב המנונא
7 differ in respect of one who uproots the fundamental injunction, whether of idolatry or other precepts, or who partially annuls and partially confirms [the prohibition of] idolatry, since the Torah said, from the way, implying even part of the way;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' He regards the deduction of 'to walk', which refers to positive commands, as applying to all precepts. ');"><sup>12</sup></span> but if he partly confirms and partly annuls any other precept, all agree that he is exempt.
ח אביי סבר לה כרב חסדא ומתרץ לה כרב חסדא המתנבא לעקור דבר מן התורה דברי הכל בחנק לקיים מקצת ולבטל מקצת ר"ש פוטר והוא הדין לרבנן ובעבודת כוכבים אפילו אמר היום עיבדוה ולמחר בטלוה חייב מר כדאית ליה ומר כדאית ליה
8 Our Rabbis taught: If one prophesies so as to eradicate a law of the Torah, he is liable [to death]; partially to confirm and partially to annul it. — R. Simeon exempts him. But as for idolatry, even if he said, 'Serve it to-day and destroy it to-morrow,'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That is partial annulment. ');"><sup>13</sup></span> all declare him liable. Now, Abaye agrees with R. Hisda,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Missing footnote. ');"><sup>14</sup></span>
ט רבא סבר לה כרב המנונא ומתרץ לה כרב המנונא המתנבא לעקור דבר מן התורה בין בעבודת כוכבים בין בשאר מצות חייב מר כדאית ליה ומר כדאית ליה לקיים מקצת ולבטל מקצת בשאר מצות ר"ש פוטר והוא הדין לרבנן ובעבודת כוכבים אפילו אומר היום עיבדוה ולמחר בטלוה חייב מר כדאית ליה ומר כדאית ליה
9 and reconciles this with him; Raba holds with R. Hamnuna, and explains it according to his views. 'Abaye, agrees with R. Hisda, and reconciles it with him.' [Thus:] If one prophesies so as to uproot a law of the Torah, all agree that he is strangled; partially to confirm and partially to annul it, — R. Simeon exempts him, and the Rabbis likewise.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Simeon is mentioned for this reason; According to him, the death from which he is exempt is obviously strangulation. Consequently the first clause, teaching that he is liable, must mean to strangulation, and R. Simeon not being mentioned there, that is the general opinion. Had the second clause simply stated that he is exempt, it would imply from stoning or strangulation, according to either the Rabbis or R. Simeon, and hence the liability of the first clause would be the same. ');"><sup>15</sup></span> But as for idolatry, even if he said, 'Serve it to-day and destroy it to-morrow', he is liable — each according to his views.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., In the opinion of the Rabbis, to stoning; of R. Simeon, to strangulation. ');"><sup>16</sup></span>
י א"ר אבהו א"ר יוחנן בכל אם יאמר לך נביא עבור על דברי תורה שמע לו חוץ מעבודת כוכבים שאפילו מעמיד לך חמה באמצע הרקיע אל תשמע לו תניא רבי יוסי הגלילי אומר הגיע תורה לסוף דעתה של עבודת כוכבים לפיכך נתנה תורה ממשלה בה שאפילו מעמיד לך חמה באמצע הרקיע אל תשמע לו
10 'Raba holds with R. Hamnuna, and explains it according to his opinion'; If one prophesies to uproot an injunction of the Torah, whether idolatry or any other precept, he is liable, — each according to his views. Partially to confirm and partially to annul it. R. Simeon declares him exempt, and also the Rabbis.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In R. Hamnuna's view, R. Simeon is particularly mentioned to shew that he is exempt even from strangulation, a more lenient death than stoning; hence certainly from stoning. ');"><sup>17</sup></span> But as for idolatry, even if he said, 'Serve it to-day and destroy it to-morrow,' he is liable — each according to his views.
יא תניא א"ר עקיבא חס ושלום שהקדוש ב"ה מעמיד חמה לעוברי רצונו אלא כגון חנניה בן עזור שמתחלתו נביא אמת ולבסוף נביא שקר:
11 R. Abbahu said in R. Johanan's name; In every matter, if a prophet tells you to transgress the commands of the Torah, obey him,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' E.g., as in the case of Elijah, who ordered sacrifices to be offered on Mount Carmel. ');"><sup>18</sup></span> with the exception of idolatry; should he even cause the sun to stand still in the middle of the heavens for you [as proof of Divine inspiration], do not hearken to him.
יב וזוממי בת כהן: מנהני מילי אמר רב אחא בריה דרב איקא דתניא ר' יוסי אומר מה ת"ל (דברים יט, יט) ועשיתם לו כאשר זמם לעשות לאחיו לפי שכל המזוממין שבתורה זוממיהן ובועליהן כיוצא בהן
12 It has been taught: R. Jose the Galilean said: The Torah understood the extreme depths [of depravity inherent in] idolatry,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Or, the wiles by which idolatry attracts. ');"><sup>19</sup></span> therefore the Torah gave him [the false prophet] power therein, that should he even cause the sun to stand still in the middle of the heavens, thou must not hearken to him.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since Scripture says, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder, it follows that the false prophet must have been endowed with such powers. ');"><sup>20</sup></span>
יג בת כהן היא בשריפה ואין בועלה בשריפה זוממין איני יודע אם לו הוקשו אם לה הוקשו כשהוא אומר לעשות לאחיו לאחיו ולא לאחותו:
13 R. Akiba said; God forbid that the Almighty should cause the sun to stand still at the behest of those who transgressed His will, but [the Torah refers to one] as Hananiah the son of Azur, who was originally a true prophet and [only] subsequently became a false prophet.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The 'sign' being given during his first phase, and he supported himself thereon in his second. ');"><sup>21</sup></span> LIKEWISE [WITNESSES, PROVED] <i>ZOMEMIM</i>, [IN AN ACCUSATION OF ADULTERY AGAINST] A PRIEST'S DAUGHTER, — AND HER PARAMOUR. Whence do we know this? — R. Abba the son of R. Ika said; For it has been taught: R. Jose said; Why does Scripture state, Then shall ye do unto him, as he had thought to have done unto his brother?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XIX, 19: 'unto his brother' is redundant. ');"><sup>22</sup></span>
יד <br><br><big><strong>הדרן עלך אלו הן הנחנקין</strong></big><br><br>
14 For all falsified witnesses<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [In cases of incest including adultery Lec. var. who are sentenced to death.] ');"><sup>23</sup></span> [spoken of] in the Torah, — the <i>zomemim</i> and the paramours are assimilated to them;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [I.e., the zomemim, to the death they sought to impose on the women, and the paramours, to that of the women the had dishonoured.] ');"><sup>24</sup></span>
טו מתני׳ <big><strong>כל</strong></big> ישראל יש להם חלק לעולם הבא שנאמר (ישעיהו ס, כא) ועמך כולם צדיקים לעולם יירשו ארץ נצר מטעי מעשה ידי להתפאר ואלו שאין להם חלק לעולם הבא האומר אין תחיית המתים מן התורה ואין תורה מן השמים ואפיקורוס
15 but in the case of a priest's daughter. 'She [profaneth]' teaches, 'She' is executed by burning, but not her paramour. Hence, I do not know whether the <i>zomemim</i> are likened to him or to her:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 347. n. 2. ');"><sup>25</sup></span> but when the Writ saith&nbsp;… 'to have done unto his brother', it teaches, to his 'brother,' but not to his sister.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., he is executed by her paramour's death, not her own. ');"><sup>26</sup></span>
טז ר"ע אומר אף הקורא בספרים החיצונים והלוחש על המכה ואומר (שמות טו, כו) כל המחלה אשר שמתי במצרים לא אשים עליך כי אני ה' רופאך אבא שאול אומר אף ההוגה את השם באותיותיו
16 <b><i>MISHNAH</i></b>. <font>ALL ISRAEL<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is not a dogmatic assertion that only Israel has a portion in the world to come, but is closely connected with the preceding chapters, and asserts that even those who were executed by Beth din are not shut out from the future world, as is stated in VI, 2. ');"><sup>28</sup></span></font> HAVE A PORTION IN THE WORLD TO COME,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The conception of what is to be understood by the future world is rather vague in the Talmud. In general, it is the opposite of [H], this world. In Ber. I, 5, 'this world' is opposed to the days of the Messiah. Whether the Messianic era is thus identical with the future world, and these again with the period of resurrection, is a moot point (v. infra, 91b). The following quotation from G. Moore, 'Judaism' (Vol. 2, p. 389) is apposite: 'Any attempt to systematize the Jewish notions of the hereafter imposes upon them an order and consistency which does not exist in them.' ');"><sup>29</sup></span>
יז שלשה מלכים וארבעה הדיוטות אין להן חלק לעולם הבא שלשה מלכים ירבעם אחאב ומנשה ר' יהודה אומר מנשה יש לו חלק לעולם הבא שנאמר (דברי הימים ב לג, יג) ויתפלל אליו וישמע תחנתו וישיבהו ירושלים למלכותו אמרו לו למלכותו השיבו ולא לחיי העולם הבא השיבו ארבעה הדיוטות בלעם ודואג ואחיתופל וגחזי:
17 FOR IT IS WRITTEN, <font>THY PEOPLE ARE ALL RIGHTEOUS; THEY SHALL INHERIT THE LAND FOR EVER</font>, THE BRANCH OF MY PLANTING, THE WORK OF MY HANDS, THAT I MAY BE GLORIFIED.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Isa. LX, 22. ');"><sup>30</sup></span> BUT THE FOLLOWING HAVE NO PORTION THEREIN: HE WHO MAINTAINS THAT RESURRECTION IS NOT A BIBLICAL DOCTRINE,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'that resurrection is not intimated in the Torah.' The doctrine of resurrection was denied by the Sadducees and the Samaritans. It was to oppose these that the doctrine was emphatically asserted in the second of the Eighteen Benedictions (v. W.O. Oesterley. The Jewish Background of Christian Liturgy, Oxford, 1925, 60ff.). According to the present text, however, the reference is not to one who denies the fact of resurrection, but that it is intimated in the Torah. (On the importance of conceding the Biblical origin of this tenet, v. p. 604, n. 12.) But D.S. omits the phrase as interpolated, and he is supported by the Tosef. XIII, 5. ');"><sup>31</sup></span>
יח <big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> וכל כך למה תנא הוא כפר בתחיית המתים לפיכך לא יהיה לו חלק בתחיית המתים שכל מדותיו של הקב"ה מדה כנגד מדה
18 THE TORAH WAS NOT DIVINELY REVEALED, &nbsp; &nbsp; AND AN <font>EPIKOROS</font>.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the first place, the word denotes an adherent of the Epicurean philosophy, and then, one who lives a licentious and dissolute life. The word has also been derived from [H] (cf. [H]) to be unbridled, and it is frequently used as a synonym of min (q.v. p. 604, n. 12), heretic. The Gemara defines it as one who speaks disparagingly of the Bible and its disciples. ');"><sup>32</sup></span> R. AKIBA ADDED: <font>ONE WHO READS UNCANONICAL BOOKS</font>.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'the external books'. Graetz, Gesch. IV, p. 99, regards this as referring to un-Jewish, particularly Gnostic literature. Weiss takes a similar view. The pernicious influence of Gnosticism, particularly as it impaired the pure monotheism of Judaism, made the Rabbis very anxious to stem its spread, and hence R. Akiba's dictum. (Weiss maintains that Elisha b. Abuia's revolt against the Rabbis was in some measure occasioned by the influence of Gnosticism.) On this view, ordinary reading is referred to. There are indications, however, that something more is meant. The J. Tal. a.l. adds: 'E.g.. the books of Ben Sira and Ben La'anah. But the reading of Homer and all subsequent books is as the reading of a letter.' In spite of the fact that the Bab. Tal. forbids the books of Ben Sira, it is evident from the discussion that all its contents were well-known, and Sira's wisdom is frequently quoted by the Talmudists. It is also difficult to see why greater exception should be taken to Sira than to Homer. To obviate these difficulties the theory has been put forward that the prohibition is against reading these uncanonical works publicly, treating them as the Scripture and expounding them to the community. Private reading, however, would on this theory not come within the ban. (V. Krochmal More Nebuche ha-Zeman, XI, 5.) ');"><sup>33</sup></span>
יט דאמר ר' שמואל בר נחמני אמר ר' יונתן מניין שכל מדותיו של הקב"ה מדה כנגד מדה שנאמר (מלכים ב ז, א) ויאמר אלישע שמעו דבר ה' [וגו'] כעת מחר סאה סלת בשקל וסאתים שעורים בשקל בשער שומרון וכתיב (מלכים ב ז, ב) ויען השליש אשר (המלך) נשען על ידו את איש האלהים ויאמר הנה ה' עושה ארובות בשמים היהיה הדבר הזה ויאמר הנך רואה בעיניך ומשם לא תאכל
19 ALSO ONE WHO WHISPERS [A CHARM] OVER A WOUND AND SAYS, I WILL BRING NONE OF THESE DISEASES UPON THEE WHICH I BROUGHT UPON THE EGYPTIANS: FOR I AM THE LORD THAT HEALETH THEE.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XV, 26. ');"><sup>34</sup></span> ABBA SAUL SAYS: ALSO <font>ONE WHO PRONOUNCES THE DIVINE NAME AS IT IS SPELT</font>.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'according to its letters'. ');"><sup>35</sup></span> THREE KINGS AND FOUR COMMONERS HAVE NO PORTION IN THE WORLD TO COME: THE THREE KINGS ARE JEROBOAM, AHAB, AND MANASSEH.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Jeroboam, the son of Nebat, who is frequently stigmatised in the Bible as having 'sinned and caused Israel to sin'. Ahab, the son of Omri, a later King; v. I Kings. XXI, 21. Manasseh, the son of Hezekiah, King of Judah; v. II Kings. XXI. ');"><sup>36</sup></span> R. JUDAH SAID: MANASSEH HATH A PORTION THEREIN, FOR IT IS WRITTEN, 'AND HE PRAYED UNTO &nbsp; &nbsp; HIM, AND WAS INTREATED OF HIM, AND HE HEARKENED TO HIS SUPPLICATION AND THEY RESTORED HIM TO JERUSALEM, TO HIS KINGDOM.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' II Chron. XXXIII, 13. ');"><sup>37</sup></span> THEY [THE SAGES] ANSWERED HIM: THEY RESTORED HIM TO HIS KINGDOM, BUT <font>NOT TO [HIS PORTION IN] THE WORLD TO COME</font>. FOUR COMMONERS, VIZ., <font>BALAAM</font>, DOEG, AHITOPHEL, AND GEHAZI.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Balaam: v. Num. XXXI. 8, 16; Doeg the Edomite: v. I Sam. XXI, 22; Ahitophel: v. II Sam. XV; Gehazi: v. II Kings V, 20. ');"><sup>38</sup></span> <b><i>GEMARA</i></b>. And why such [severity]? — A Tanna taught: Since he denied the resurrection of the dead, therefore he shall not share in that resurrection, for in all the measures [of punishment or reward] taken by the Holy One, blessed be He, the Divine act befits the [human] deed.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'Measure for measure'. ');"><sup>39</sup></span> As it is written, Then Elisha said, Hear ye the word of the Lord; Thus saith the Lord, To-morrow about this time shall a measure of fine flour be sold for a <i>shekel</i>, and two measures of barley for a <i>shekel</i>, in the gates of Samaria.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' II Kings VII, 1. ');"><sup>40</sup></span> And it is written, Then a lord on whose hand the king leaned answered the man of God, and said, Behold, if the Lord made windows in heaven, might this thing be? And he said, Behold, thou shalt see it with thine eyes, but shalt not eat thereof.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. 2. ');"><sup>41</sup></span>
Previous ChapterNext Chapter