1. Hebrew Bible, Deuteronomy, 12.21 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
| 12.21. כִּי־יִרְחַק מִמְּךָ הַמָּקוֹם אֲשֶׁר יִבְחַר יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ לָשׂוּם שְׁמוֹ שָׁם וְזָבַחְתָּ מִבְּקָרְךָ וּמִצֹּאנְךָ אֲשֶׁר נָתַן יְהוָה לְךָ כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוִּיתִךָ וְאָכַלְתָּ בִּשְׁעָרֶיךָ בְּכֹל אַוַּת נַפְשֶׁךָ׃ | 12.21. If the place which the LORD thy God shall choose to put His name there be too far from thee, then thou shalt kill of thy herd and of thy flock, which the LORD hath given thee, as I have commanded thee, and thou shalt eat within thy gates, after all the desire of thy soul." |
|
2. Hebrew Bible, Genesis, 32.32 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
| 32.32. וַיִּזְרַח־לוֹ הַשֶּׁמֶשׁ כַּאֲשֶׁר עָבַר אֶת־פְּנוּאֵל וְהוּא צֹלֵעַ עַל־יְרֵכוֹ׃ | 32.32. And the sun rose upon him as he passed over Peniel, and he limped upon his thigh." |
|
3. Hebrew Bible, Leviticus, 11.40, 17.13-17.14, 18.5, 22.28 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
| 17.13. וְאִישׁ אִישׁ מִבְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וּמִן־הַגֵּר הַגָּר בְּתוֹכָם אֲשֶׁר יָצוּד צֵיד חַיָּה אוֹ־עוֹף אֲשֶׁר יֵאָכֵל וְשָׁפַךְ אֶת־דָּמוֹ וְכִסָּהוּ בֶּעָפָר׃ 17.14. כִּי־נֶפֶשׁ כָּל־בָּשָׂר דָּמוֹ בְנַפְשׁוֹ הוּא וָאֹמַר לִבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל דַּם כָּל־בָּשָׂר לֹא תֹאכֵלוּ כִּי נֶפֶשׁ כָּל־בָּשָׂר דָּמוֹ הִוא כָּל־אֹכְלָיו יִכָּרֵת׃ 18.5. וּשְׁמַרְתֶּם אֶת־חֻקֹּתַי וְאֶת־מִשְׁפָּטַי אֲשֶׁר יַעֲשֶׂה אֹתָם הָאָדָם וָחַי בָּהֶם אֲנִי יְהוָה׃ 22.28. וְשׁוֹר אוֹ־שֶׂה אֹתוֹ וְאֶת־בְּנוֹ לֹא תִשְׁחֲטוּ בְּיוֹם אֶחָד׃ | 11.40. And he that eateth of the carcass of it shall wash his clothes, and be unclean until the even; he also that beareth the carcass of it shall wash his clothes, and be unclean until the even." 17.13. And whatsoever man there be of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among them, that taketh in hunting any beast or fowl that may be eaten, he shall pour out the blood thereof, and cover it with dust." 17.14. For as to the life of all flesh, the blood thereof is all one with the life thereof; therefore I said unto the children of Israel: Ye shall eat the blood of no manner of flesh; for the life of all flesh is the blood thereof; whosoever eateth it shall be cut off." 18.5. Ye shall therefore keep My statutes, and Mine ordices, which if a man do, he shall live by them: I am the LORD." 22.28. And whether it be cow or ewe, ye shall not kill it and its young both in one day." |
|
4. Mishnah, Berachot, 9.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
| 9.5. One must bless [God] for the evil in the same way as one blesses for the good, as it says, “And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul and with all your might” (Deuteronomy 6:5). “With all your heart,” with your two impulses, the evil impulse as well as the good impulse. “With all your soul” even though he takes your soul [life] away from you. “With all your might” with all your money. Another explanation, “With all your might” whatever treatment he metes out to you. One should not show disrespect to the Eastern Gate, because it is in a direct line with the Holy of Holies. One should not enter the Temple Mount with a staff, or with shoes on, or with a wallet, or with dusty feet; nor should one make it a short cut, all the more spitting [is forbidden]. All the conclusions of blessings that were in the Temple they would say, “forever [lit. as long as the world is].” When the sectarians perverted their ways and said that there was only one world, they decreed that they should say, “for ever and ever [lit. from the end of the world to the end of the world]. They also decreed that a person should greet his fellow in God’s name, as it says, “And behold Boaz came from Bethlehem and said to the reapers, ‘May the Lord be with you.’ And they answered him, “May the Lord bless you’” (Ruth 2:. And it also says, “The Lord is with your, you valiant warrior” (Judges 6:12). And it also says, “And do not despise your mother when she grows old” (Proverbs 23:22). And it also says, “It is time to act on behalf of the Lord, for they have violated Your teaching” (Psalms 119:126). Rabbi Natan says: [this means] “They have violated your teaching It is time to act on behalf of the Lord.”" |
|
5. Mishnah, Hulin, 1.1, 2.4, 2.7, 2.9, 3.1, 3.5, 8.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
| 1.1. All may slaughter, and their slaughtering is valid, except a deaf-mute, an imbecile or a minor, lest they mess up [the animal] through their slaughtering. And if any of these slaughtered while others were standing over them, their slaughtering is valid. That which is slaughtered by a non-Jew is a nevelah and defiles by carrying. If one slaughtered at night, and also a blind man that slaughtered, the slaughtering is valid. One who slaughtered on Shabbat or Yom Kippur, even though he is liable for his own life, the slaughtering is valid." 2.4. If one first sliced the esophagus and then cut away the windpipe, or first cut away the windpipe and then sliced the esophagus; or if he sliced one of these organs and paused until the animal died; or if he thrust the knife underneath the second organ and cut it: [In all these cases] Rabbi Yeshevav says: the animal is nevelah; Rabbi Akiva says: it is terefah. Rabbi Yeshevav stated this general rule in the name of Rabbi Joshua: whenever an animal is rendered invalid by a fault in the slaughtering it is nevelah; whenever an animal has been duly slaughtered but is rendered invalid by some other defect it is terefah. And Rabbi Akiba [ultimately] agreed with him." 2.7. If one slaughtered for a non-Jew, the slaughtering is valid. Rabbi Eliezer declares it invalid. Rabbi Eliezer said: even if one slaughtered a beast with the intention that a non-Jew should eat [only] its liver, the slaughtering is invalid, for the thoughts of a non-Jew are usually directed towards idolatry. Rabbi Yose said: is there not a kal vehomer argument? For if in the case of consecrated animals, where a wrongful intention can render invalid, it is established that everything depends solely upon the intention of him who performs the service, how much more in the case of unconsecrated animals, where a wrongful intention cannot render invalid, is it not logical that everything should depend solely upon the intention of him who slaughters!" 2.9. One may not slaughter [so that the blood runs] into the sea or into rivers, or into vessels, But one may slaughter into a pool (or vessel) of water. And when on board a ship on to vessels. One may not slaughter at all into a hole, but one may dig a hole in his own house for the blood to run into. In the street, however, he should not do so as not to follow the ways of the heretics." 3.1. The following [defects] render cattle terefah:If the esophagus was pierced; If the windpipe severed; If the membrane of the brain was pierced; If the heart was pierced as far as its cavity thereof; If the spine was broken and the cord severed; If the liver was gone and none of it remained; If the lung was pierced, Or if part of it was missing Rabbi Shimon says: only if it was pierced as far as the main bronchi; If the stomach, If the gall-bladder was pierced, If the intestines were pierced; If the innermost stomach was pierced, If the greater part of the outer stomach was pierced. Rabbi Judah says: in a large animal [if it was torn] to the extent of a handbreadth, and in a small animal the greater part. If the omasum (the third stomach of a rumit) [was pierced]; of if the second stomach was pierced on the outside; If the animal fell from the roof; If most of its ribs were fractured; Or if it was mauled by a wolf Rabbi Judah says: small animals [are terefah] if mauled by a wolf, large cattle if mauled by a lion; small fowl if mauled by a hawk, large fowl if mauled by a falcon. This is the rule: if an animal with a similar defect could not continue to live, it is terefah." 3.5. [If an animal] suffered from congestion of the blood, or was overcome by smoke or by a cold, or if it ate oleander or chicken dung, or if it drank noxious water, it is permitted. If it ate poison or was bitten by a snake, it is not forbidden as trefah but it is forbidden as a danger to life." 8.5. The [milk in the] stomach [of an animal] of a Gentile or [in the stomach of] a nevelah is forbidden. If a man curdled milk with the skin of the stomach of an animal that was validly slaughtered and it imparted its flavor [to the milk] it is forbidden. The [milk in the] stomach of a validly slaughtered animal which had suckled from a terefah animal is forbidden. The [milk in the] stomach of a terefah animal which had suckled from a kosher animal is permitted, because the milk is collected inside." |
|
6. Mishnah, Megillah, 4.8-4.9 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
| 4.8. If one says, “I will not pass before the ark in colored clothes,” even in white clothes he may not pass before it. [If one says], “I will not pass before it in shoes,” even barefoot he may not pass before it. One who makes his tefillin [for the head] round, it is dangerous and has no religious value. If he put them on his forehead or on the palm of his hand, behold this is the way of heresy. If he overlaid them with gold or put [the one for the hand] on his sleeve, behold this is the manner of the outsiders." 4.9. If one says “May the good bless you,” this is the way of heresy. [If one says], “May Your mercy reach the nest of a bird,” “May Your name be mentioned for the good,” “We give thanks, we give thanks,” they silence him. One who uses euphemisms in the portion dealing with forbidden marriages, he is silenced. If he says, [instead of] “And you shall not give any of your seed to be passed to Moloch,” (Leviticus 18:21) “You shall not give [your seed] to pass to a Gentile woman,” he silenced with a rebuke." |
|
7. Mishnah, Parah, 3.3 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
| 3.3. They arrived at the Temple Mount and got down. Beneath the Temple Mount and the courts was a hollow which served as a protection against a grave in the depths. And at the entrance of the courtyard there was the jar of the ashes of the sin-offerings. They would bring a male from among the sheep and tie a rope between its horns, and a stick or a bushy twig was tied at the other end of the rope, and this was thrown into the jar. They then struck the male [sheep] was so that it started backwards. And [a child] took the ashes and put it [enough] so that it could be seen upon the water. Rabbi Yose said: do not give the Sadducees an opportunity to rule! Rather, [a child] himself took it and mixed it." |
|
8. Mishnah, Rosh Hashanah, 2.1 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
| 2.1. If they don’t know him [the one who came to testify], they send another with him to testify concerning [his reliability]. Originally testimony concerning the new moon was accepted from anyone. When the minim disrupted this, it was decreed that testimony should be received only from persons known [to the court]." |
|
9. Mishnah, Sanhedrin, 4.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
| 4.5. How did they admonish witnesses in capital cases? They brought them in and admonished them, [saying], “Perhaps you will say something that is only a supposition or hearsay or secondhand, or even from a trustworthy man. Or perhaps you do not know that we shall check you with examination and inquiry? Know, moreover, that capital cases are not like non-capital cases: in non-capital cases a man may pay money and so make atonement, but in capital cases the witness is answerable for the blood of him [that is wrongfully condemned] and the blood of his descendants [that should have been born to him] to the end of the world.” For so have we found it with Cain that murdered his brother, for it says, “The bloods of your brother cry out” (Gen. 4:10). It doesn’t say, “The blood of your brother”, but rather “The bloods of your brother” meaning his blood and the blood of his descendants. Another saying is, “The bloods of your brother” that his blood was cast over trees and stones. Therefore but a single person was created in the world, to teach that if any man has caused a single life to perish from Israel, he is deemed by Scripture as if he had caused a whole world to perish; and anyone who saves a single soul from Israel, he is deemed by Scripture as if he had saved a whole world. Again [but a single person was created] for the sake of peace among humankind, that one should not say to another, “My father was greater than your father”. Again, [but a single person was created] against the heretics so they should not say, “There are many ruling powers in heaven”. Again [but a single person was created] to proclaim the greatness of the Holy Blessed One; for humans stamp many coins with one seal and they are all like one another; but the King of kings, the Holy Blessed One, has stamped every human with the seal of the first man, yet not one of them are like another. Therefore everyone must say, “For my sake was the world created.” And if perhaps you [witnesses] would say, “Why should we be involved with this trouble”, was it not said, “He, being a witness, whether he has seen or known, [if he does not speak it, then he shall bear his iniquity] (Lev. 5:1). And if perhaps you [witnesses] would say, “Why should we be guilty of the blood of this man?, was it not said, “When the wicked perish there is rejoicing” (Proverbs 11:10).]" |
|
10. Tosefta, Avodah Zarah, 3.3, 3.11, 3.16, 4.8-4.9, 4.11-4.12, 8.6 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
|
11. Tosefta, Bava Metzia, 2.33 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
|
12. Tosefta, Bava Qamma, 8.19 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
|
13. Tosefta, Berachot, 3.25 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
| 3.25. Eighteen Berachot (blessings) that the Sages have established [for the prayer of Shemoneh Esreh have been established] corresponding to eighteen mentionings [of God’s name] that are in [the chapter of Tehillim that begins with] “Ascribe to God, children of princes…” (Tehillim 29) And [a person] should include [the Beracha against] the heretics into [the Beracha] for the Rabbinical Jews, and [the Beracha] for the converts into [the Beracha] for the elders, and [the Beracha] for [King] David into [the Beracha] for [the rebuilding of] Jerusalem. But if he said each one of them separately he has fulfilled his obligation [of praying Shemoneh Esreh]." |
|
14. Tosefta, Hulin, 2.19-2.23, 3.24 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
|
15. Tosefta, Miqvaot, 6.1, 6.4 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
|
16. Tosefta, Niddah, 2.5 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
|
17. Tosefta, Parah, 3.3 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
|
18. Tosefta, Peah, 4.1 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
|
19. Tosefta, Sanhedrin, 8.7, 13.4-13.5 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
|
20. Tosefta, Shabbat, 13.5 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
|
21. Tosefta, Taanit, 1.10 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
|
22. Tosefta, Yevamot, 14.7 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
|
23. Tosefta, Yadayim, 2.13 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
|
24. Anon., Sifre Numbers, 143 (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE)
|
25. Babylonian Talmud, Avodah Zarah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
| 27b. סבר שיולי משאיל לו כי היכי דמשאיל לו משאיל לאיניש אחרינא ואתא ההוא גברא לאורועי נפשיה,אמר רבא א"ר יוחנן ואמרי לה אמר רב חסדא אמר ר' יוחנן ספק חי ספק מת אין מתרפאין מהן ודאי מת מתרפאין מהן,מת האיכא חיי שעה לחיי שעה לא חיישינן,ומנא תימרא דלחיי שעה לא חיישינן דכתיב (מלכים ב ז, ד) אם אמרנו נבוא העיר והרעב בעיר ומתנו שם והאיכא חיי שעה אלא לאו לחיי שעה לא חיישינן,מיתיבי לא ישא ויתן אדם עם המינין ואין מתרפאין מהן אפילו לחיי שעה,מעשה בבן דמא בן אחותו של ר' ישמעאל שהכישו נחש ובא יעקב איש כפר סכניא לרפאותו ולא הניחו ר' ישמעאל וא"ל ר' ישמעאל אחי הנח לו וארפא ממנו ואני אביא מקרא מן התורה שהוא מותר ולא הספיק לגמור את הדבר עד שיצתה נשמתו ומת,קרא עליו ר' ישמעאל אשריך בן דמא שגופך טהור ויצתה נשמתך בטהרה ולא עברת על דברי חביריך שהיו אומרים (קהלת י, ח) ופורץ גדר ישכנו נחש,שאני מינות דמשכא דאתי למימשך בתרייהו,אמר מר לא עברת על דברי חביריך שהיו אומרים ופורץ גדר ישכנו נחש איהו נמי חויא טרקיה חויא דרבנן דלית ליה אסותא כלל,ומאי ה"ל למימר (ויקרא יח, ה) וחי בהם ולא שימות בהם,ור' ישמעאל הני מילי בצינעא אבל בפרהסיא לא דתניא היה רבי ישמעאל אומר מנין שאם אומרים לו לאדם עבוד עבודת כוכבים ואל תהרג שיעבוד ואל יהרג ת"ל וחי בהם ולא שימות בהם יכול אפילו בפרהסיא ת"ל (ויקרא כב, לב) ולא תחללו את שם קדשי,אמר רבה בר בר חנה אמר רבי יוחנן כל מכה שמחללין עליה את השבת אין מתרפאין מהן ואיכא דאמרי אמר רבה בר בר חנה אמר ר"י כל | 27b. The Gemara explains the rationale for this leniency: The gentile bthinksto himself that the Jew bis asking himfor his opinion, and bjust as he is asking him, hewill also bask other people. Andthe gentile further reasons that if the Jew understands that the gentile provided him with bad advice, bthat man,i.e., the gentile, bwill bring harm to himselfby damaging his own reputation. It is therefore assumed that the gentile will provide good advice in order to avoid sullying his reputation.,§ The Gemara analyzes a situation in which one may receive medical attention from gentiles. bRava saysthat bRabbi Yoḥa says, and some saythat it was bRav Ḥisdawho bsaysthat bRabbi Yoḥa says:If there is buncertaintyas to whether a patient will blivethrough his ailment bor diefrom it, the patient bmay not be treated bygentile doctors, due to the concern that a gentile doctor may kill him. But if it is bcertainthat he will bdiefrom his affliction if he does not receive medical attention, the patient bis treated by them,as it is possible that a gentile physician will save him.,The Gemara challenges: Even if it is certain that the patient will bdieif he is not treated, bnevertheless, there isvalue in btemporal life,i.e., it is preferable for the Jew to live as long as his ailment permits rather than risking a premature death at the hands of a gentile physician. The Gemara explains: bWe are not concerned withthe value of btemporal lifewhen there is a possibility of permanent recovery, and therefore it is preferable to receive medical attention from a gentile despite the risk involved.,The Gemara asks: bAnd from where do you say that we are not concerned withthe value of btemporal life? As it is writtenwith regard to the discussion held by four lepers left outside a besieged city: b“If we say: We will enter into the city, then the famine is in the city, and we shall die there;and if we sit still here, we also die. Now therefore come, and let us fall unto the host of the Arameans; if they save us alive, we shall live; and if they kill us, we shall but die” (II Kings 7:4). The starving lepers decided to risk premature death rather than waiting to die of starvation. The Gemara asks rhetorically: bBut isn’t there temporal lifeto be lost, in which case it would be preferable for the lepers to remain in their current location? bRather, is it notapparent that bwe are not concerned withthe value of btemporal life? /b,The Gemara braises an objectionfrom a ibaraita /i: bA person may not engage in dealings with heretics, and one may not be treated by them even ina case where it is clear that without medical attention one will experience only btemporal life. /b,The ibaraitarelates an incident illustrating this point. There was ban incident involving ben Dama, son of Rabbi Yishmael’s sister,in bwhich a snake bit him. Andfollowing the attack, bYa’akov of the village of Sekhanya,who was a heretic, a disciple of Jesus the Nazarene, bcame to treat him, but Rabbi Yishmael did not let himdo so. bAndben Dama bsaid to him: Rabbi Yishmael, my brother, let himtreat me, band I will be healed by him. And I will cite a verse from the Torahto prove bthataccepting medical treatment from a heretic bis permittedin this situation. bButben Dama bdid not manage to complete the statement before his soul departedfrom his body band he died. /b, bRabbi Yishmael recited with regard to him: Fortunate are you, ben Dama, as your body is pure and your soul departed in purity, and you did not transgress the statement of your colleagues, who would statethe verse: b“And who breaks through a fence, a snake shall bite him”(Ecclesiastes 10:8), i.e., one is punished for ignoring an ordice of the Sages. This incident indicates that it is not permitted for one to accept medical treatment from a heretic even if it is clear that without it he will live only a short while.,The Gemara explains: bHeresy is different, as it is enticing.In other words, it is prohibited to accept medical treatment from a heretic, bas one might come to be drawn afterhis heresy. By contrast, receiving medical attention from a gentile is permitted if it is certain that one will die if he is not treated., bThe Master saidabove: bYou did not transgress the statement of your colleagues, who would statethe verse: b“And who breaks through a fence, a snake shall bite him.”The Gemara asks: But ben Dama bwas also bitten by a snake,even before this declaration of Rabbi Yishmael, so how can he be considered fortunate? The Gemara explains: bThe snakementioned in the curse bof the Sagesis different, bas it has no remedy whatsoever.Although ben Dama was bitten by a snake, he could have been healed.,The Gemara asks: bAnd what wouldben Dama bhave said?What verse did he intend to cite as proof that it was permitted for him to be healed by a heretic? The verse: “You shall therefore keep My statutes, and My ordices, which if a man do, bhe shall live by them”(Leviticus 18:5). This teaches that one should live by God’s mitzvot, band not that heshould bdie by them.This verse serves as a source for the ihalakhathat one may violate a prohibition in order to save a life., bAndwhy does bRabbi Yishmaeldisagree with ben Dama? He maintains that bthis matterapplies only bin private, but in publicone bmay nottransgress a prohibition even to save a life. bAs it is taughtin a ibaraitathat bRabbi Yishmael would say: From whereis it derived bthat ifoppressors bsay to a person: Worship an idol and youwill bnot be killed, that one should worshipthe idol band not be killed? The verse states: “He shall live by them,” and not that he should die by them.One bmighthave thought that this applies beven in public.Therefore, bthe verse states: “And you shall not profane My holy name”(Leviticus 22:32).,§ The Gemara examines various circumstances in which one is permitted to receive treatment from a gentile. bRabba bar bar Ḥana saysthat bRabbi Yoḥa says:With regard to bany injury for which Shabbat is desecrated, one may not be treated bygentiles. bAnd there arethose bwho saythat bRabba bar bar Ḥana saysthat bRabbi Yoḥa says:With regard to bany /b |
|
26. Babylonian Talmud, Hulin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
| 13b. בניו ממזרין,ות"ק אשתו לא מפקר,אמר מר שחיטת עובד כוכבים נבלה וניחוש שמא מין הוא אמר רב נחמן אמר רבה בר אבוה אין מינין באומות עובדי כוכבים,והא קאחזינן דאיכא אימא אין רוב עובדי כוכבים מינין סבר לה כי הא דאמר ר' חייא בר אבא א"ר יוחנן נכרים שבחוצה לארץ לאו עובדי עבודת כוכבים הן אלא מנהג אבותיהן בידיהן,אמר רב יוסף בר מניומי אמר רב נחמן אין מינין באומות עובדי כוכבים למאי אילימא לשחיטה השתא שחיטת מין דישראל אמרת אסירא דעובד כוכבים מבעיא אלא למורידין השתא דישראל מורידין דעובדי כוכבים מבעיא,אמר רב עוקבא בר חמא לקבל מהן קרבן דתניא (ויקרא א, ב) מכם ולא כולכם להוציא את המומר מכם בכם חלקתי ולא בעובדי כוכבים,ממאי דלמא הכי קאמר מישראל מצדיקי קבל מרשיעי לא תקבל אבל בעובדי כוכבים כלל כלל לא לא ס"ד דתניא איש מה ת"ל איש איש לרבות העובדי כוכבים שנודרים נדרים ונדבות כישראל:,ומטמאה במשא: פשיטא כיון דנבלה היא מטמאה במשא אמר רבא הכי קתני זו מטמאה במשא ויש לך אחרת שהיא מטמאה אפילו באהל ואיזו זו תקרובת עבודת כוכבים וכרבי יהודה בן בתירא,איכא דאמרי אמר רבא הכי קתני זו מטמאה במשא ויש לך אחרת שהיא כזו שמטמאה במשא ואינה מטמאה באהל ואיזו זו תקרובת עבודת כוכבים ודלא כר' יהודה בן בתירא,דתניא ר' יהודה בן בתירא אומר מנין לתקרובת עבודת כוכבים שהיא מטמאה באהל שנאמר (תהלים קו, כח) ויצמדו לבעל פעור ויאכלו זבחי מתים מה מת מטמא באהל אף תקרובת עבוד' כוכבי' מטמאה באהל:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big השוחט בלילה וכן הסומא ששחט שחיטתו כשרה:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big השוחט דיעבד אין לכתחלה לא ורמינהי לעולם שוחטין בין ביום ובין בלילה בין בראש הגג בין בראש הספינה,אר"פ בשאבוקה כנגדו אמר רב אשי דיקא נמי דקתני התם דומיא דיום והכא דומיא דסומא ש"מ: | 13b. bhis sons are imamzerim /i,as he is indifferent to his wife’s engaging in adultery.,The Gemara asks: bAnd the first itanna /i,why did he not include the ruling that the sons of a heretic are imamzerim /i? The Gemara answers: In his opinion, a heretic bdoes not release his wifeand allow her to engage in adultery., bThe Master saidin the mishna: bSlaughterperformed by ba gentilerenders the animal ban unslaughtered carcass.The Gemara challenges this: bAnd let us be concernedthat bperhaps he is a hereticwho is a devout idolater and deriving benefit from his slaughter is prohibited. bRav Naḥman saidthat bRabba bar Avuh says: There are nosuch bheretics among the nationsof the world.,The Gemara asks: bBut don’t we see that there are?The Gemara answers: bSay the majority ofthe people of bthe nationsof the world bare not heretics,and with regard to slaughter one follows the majority. The Gemara notes: Rabba bar Avuh bholds in accordance with that which Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba saysthat bRabbi Yoḥa says:The status of bgentiles outside of EretzYisrael is bnotthat of bidol worshippers,as their worship is not motivated by faith and devotion. bRather, it isa traditional bcustom of their ancestorsthat was transmitted bto them. /b, bRav Yosef bar Minyumi saysthat bRav Naḥman says: There are no heretics among the nationsof the world, i.e., gentile heretics do not have the halakhic status of actual heretics. The Gemara asks: bWith regard to whatmatter did Rav Naḥman state the ihalakha /i? bIf we saythat it is bwith regard to slaughter, nowthat byou said the slaughter of a Jewish heretic is forbidden,is it bnecessaryto say the slaughter bof a gentileheretic is forbidden? bRather,it is bwith regard tothe ihalakhathat bone lowersthem into a pit, i.e., one may kill a heretic, and Rav Naḥman holds that one may not kill them. But this too is difficult, as bnowif bone lowers a Jewishheretic into a pit, is it bnecessaryto say bthatone lowers ba gentileheretic?, bRav Ukva bar Ḥama said:It is stated bwith regard to accepting an offering from them, as it is taughtin a ibaraitawith regard to the verse: “When any person of you shall bring an offering” (Leviticus 1:2): The verse states: b“of you,” and not:of ball of you, to exclude theJewish btransgressorwho regularly violates a prohibition. Furthermore, God states: b“of you,”to mean that bamong you,the Jews, bI distinguishedbetween a transgressor and other Jews, bbut not among the nations.One accepts an offering from all gentiles, even a heretic.,The Gemara asks: bFrom wheredo you draw that conclusion? bPerhaps thisis what the verse bis saying:With regard to offerings bfrom Jews, from righteousJews bacceptthe offering and bfrom wickedJews bdo not acceptthe offering; bbut with regard to the nations of the world, do notaccept their offerings bat all.The Gemara rejects that possibility: That bshould not enter your mind, as it is taughtin a ibaraitawith regard to the verse: “Any man [ iish ish /i] from the house of Israel…who shall sacrifice his offering” (Leviticus 22:18): Since it would have been sufficient to write: bA man [ iish /i], whatis the meaning when bthe verse states: “Any man [ iish ish /i]”?It serves bto include the gentiles, whomay bvowto bring bvow offerings and gift offerings like a Jew. /b,§ The mishna states with regard to an animal slaughtered by a gentile: bAndthe carcass bimparts ritual impurity through carrying.The Gemara asks: Isn’t it bobvious? Since it isconsidered ban unslaughtered carcass it imparts ritual impurity through carrying. Rava saidthat bthisis what the itanna bis teaching: Thisslaughtered animal bimparts ritual impurity through carrying, and you have anotheranimal bthat imparts impurity even in a tent,i.e., if one is beneath the same roof with this animal he becomes impure even though he neither touched it nor carried it. bAnd whichanimal is that? bThatanimal bis an idolatrous offering, andthis statement is bin accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Yehuda ben Beteiracited below., bThere arethose bwho sayan alternative version of Rava’s statement: bRava saidthat bthisis what the itanna bis teaching: Thisslaughtered animal bimparts ritual impurity through carrying, and you have anotheranimal bthat is like thisone in bthatit bimparts ritual impurity through carrying and does not impart impurity in a tent. And whichanimal is this? bThisanimal bis an idolatrous offering, andthis statement is bnot in accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Yehuda ben Beteira. /b, bAs it is taughtin a ibaraitathat bRabbi Yehuda ben Beteira says: From whereis it derived with regard bto an idolatrous offering that it imparts impurity in a tent?It is derived from a verse, bas it is stated: “They adhered to Ba’al-Peor and ate the offerings to the dead”(Psalms 106:28). bJust as a corpse imparts impurity in a tent, so too an idolatrous offering imparts impurity in a tent. /b, strongMISHNA: /strong In the case of bone who slaughtersan animal bat night, and likewisein the case of bthe blindperson bwho slaughtersan animal, bhis slaughter is valid. /b, strongGEMARA: /strong The Gemara infers from the formulation of the mishna: bOne who slaughters,and not: One may slaughter, that with regard to the slaughter of one who slaughters at night, bafter the fact, yes,it is valid, but iab initio /i,one may bnotdo so. The Gemara braises a contradictionfrom a ibaraita( iTosefta1:4): bOne may always slaughter, both during the day and at night, both on the rooftop and atop a ship,indicating that slaughter at night is permitted iab initio /i., bRav Pappa said:The itannaof the ibaraitais referring btoa case bwherethere is ba torch oppositethe slaughterer; therefore, it is permitted iab initio /i. bRav Ashi said:The language of the ibaraita bis also precise, asslaughter at night bis taught therein the ibaraita bsimilar toslaughter bduring the day,based on the juxtaposition: Both during the day and at night. bAnd hereslaughter at night is taught bsimilar tothe slaughter performed bby a blindperson, with no light, based on the juxtaposition: One who slaughters at night, and likewise the blind person who slaughters. Therefore, the slaughter is valid only after the fact. The Gemara concludes: bLearn from it. /b |
|
27. Babylonian Talmud, Pesahim, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
| 56a. ואוכלין מתחת הנשרים בשבת ונותנין פאה לירק ומיחו בידם חכמים:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big ת"ר ששה דברים עשה חזקיה המלך על שלשה הודו לו ועל שלשה לא הודו לו גירר עצמות אביו על מטה של חבלים והודו לו כיתת נחש הנחשת והודו לו גנז ספר רפואות והודו לו,ועל שלשה לא הודו לו קיצץ דלתות של היכל ושיגרן למלך אשור ולא הודו לו סתם מי גיחון העליון ולא הודו לו עיבר ניסן בניסן ולא הודו לו:,מרכיבין דקלים כל היום וכו': היכי עבדי אמר רב יהודה מייתי אסא דרא ושיכרא דדפנא וקימחא דשערי דרמי במנא דלא חלפי עליה ארבעין יומין ומרתחי להו ושדו להו לדיקלא בליביה וכל דקאי בארבע אמות דידיה אי לא עבדי ליה הכי צאוי לאלתר רב אחא בריה דרבא אמר מנחי כופרא דיכרא לנוקבתא:,וכורכין את שמע: היכי עבדי אמר רב יהודה אומרים (דברים ו, ד) שמע ישראל ה' אלהינו ה' אחד ולא היו מפסיקין רבא אמר מפסיקין היו אלא שהיו אומרים היום על לבבך דמשמע היום על לבבך ולא מחר על לבבך: ת"ר כיצד היו כורכין את שמע אומרים שמע ישראל ה' אלהינו ה' אחד ולא היו מפסיקין דברי רבי מאיר רבי יהודה אומר מפסיקין היו אלא שלא היו אומרים ברוך שם כבוד מלכותו לעולם ועד,ואנן מאי טעמא אמרינן ליה כדדריש ר' שמעון בן לקיש,דאמר רשב"ל (בראשית מט, א) ויקרא יעקב אל בניו ויאמר האספו ואגידה לכם ביקש יעקב לגלות לבניו קץ הימין ונסתלקה ממנו שכינה אמר שמא חס ושלום יש במטתי פסול כאברהם שיצא ממנו ישמעאל ואבי יצחק שיצא ממנו עשו אמרו לו בניו שמע ישראל ה' אלהינו ה' אחד אמרו כשם שאין בלבך אלא אחד כך אין בלבנו אלא אחד באותה שעה פתח יעקב אבינו ואמר ברוך שם כבוד מלכותו לעולם ועד,אמרי רבנן היכי נעביד נאמרוהו לא אמרו משה רבינו לא נאמרוהו אמרו יעקב התקינו שיהו אומרים אותו בחשאי אמר רבי יצחק אמרי דבי רבי אמי משל לבת מלך שהריחה ציקי קדירה אם תאמר יש לה גנאי לא תאמר יש לה צער התחילו עבדיה להביא בחשאי,אמר רבי אבהו התקינו שיהו אומרים אותו בקול רם מפני תרעומת המינין ובנהרדעא דליכא מינין עד השתא אמרי לה בחשאי:,תנו רבנן ששה דברים עשו אנשי יריחו שלשה ברצון חכמים ושלשה שלא ברצון חכמים ואלו ברצון חכמים מרכיבין דקלים כל היום וכורכין את שמע וקוצרין לפני העומר ואלו שלא ברצון חכמים גודשין לפני העומר ופורצין פרצות בגנותיהן ובפרדסותיהן להאכיל נשר לעניים בשני בצורת בשבתות וימים טובים ומתירין גמזיות של הקדש של חרוב ושל שקמה דברי רבי מאיר,אמר לו רבי יהודה אם ברצון חכמים היו עושין יהו כל אדם עושין כן אלא אלו ואלו שלא ברצון חכמים היו עושין על שלשה מיחו בידם ועל שלשה לא מיחו בידם,ואלו שלא מיחו בידם מרכיבין דקלים כל היום וכורכין את שמע וקוצרין וגודשין לפני העומר ואלו שמיחו בידם מתירין גמזיות של הקדש של חרוב ושל שקמה ופורצין פרצות בגנותיהן ופרדסיהן להאכיל נשר לעניים בשבתות וימים טובים בשני בצורת נותנין פיאה לירק ומיחו בידם חכמים,וסבר רבי יהודה קצירה שלא ברצון חכמים היא והתנן אנשי יריחו קוצרין לפני העומר ברצון חכמים וגודשין לפני העומר שלא ברצון חכמים ולא מיחו בידם חכמים | 56a. bandthey would beatfallen fruit bfrom beneathpalm btrees that shed fruitthat had fallen bon Shabbat; and theywould bdesignatethe produce in the bcornerfor the poor in a field of bvegetables,which is exempt from this obligation even by rabbinic law. bAnd the Sages reprimandedthe people of Jericho for doing these three things., strongGEMARA: /strong Apropos the people of Jericho, who were reprimanded for some of their actions and not reprimanded for others, the Gemara cites a similar ibaraita /i. bThe Sages taught: King Hezekiah performed six actions. With regard to threeof them, the Sages of his generation bconceded to him; and with regard to threeof them, the Sages bdid not concede to him.Due to King Hezekiah’s father’s wickedness, bhe dragged the bones of his fatherAhaz bon a bier of ropesand did not afford him the respect due to a king, bandthe Sages bconceded to him. He ground the copper snakethat Moses fashioned in the desert because Israel worshipped it, bandthe Sages bconceded to him. He suppressed the Book of Cures, and they conceded to him. /b, bAnd with regard to threeactions, the Sages bdid not concede to him. He cut off the doors of the Sanctuary and sent them to the King of Assyria, and they did not concede to himbecause he thereby demeaned the Temple. bHe sealed the waters of the upper Gihonstream, diverting its water into the city by means of a tunnel, band they did not concede to him,because he harmed the local populace in the process and should have relied upon God ( iMe’iri /i). bHe intercalatedthe year, delaying the advent of the month bof Nisan during Nisan, and they did not concede to him.The Gemara explains that he declared the first of Nisan to be the thirtieth of Adar and only then intercalated the year (see II Chronicles 30:2).,We learned in the mishna: bTheywould bgraft palm trees the entire dayof the fourteenth of Nisan. The Gemara asks: bHow did they performthis grafting? bRabbi Yehuda said: They brought fresh myrtle, strong beermade bfrom thefruit of the blaurel tree, and barley flour that was cast into a vessel, and forty days has not passedsince it was ground. bThey boiled themtogether band pouredthe mixture binto the core of the palm tree.And for banytree bstanding within four cubits of thattree, bif they did not perform thistreatment with it, bit would immediately witherbecause the tree that received the treatment would grow faster at the expense of the surrounding trees. bRav Aḥa, sonof bRava, said: They placed a branch of a male palm tree on the female,and by doing so the female tree would yield fruit.,We learned in the mishna that the residents of Jericho would bbundle iShema /i.The Gemara asks: What does it mean that they bundled iShema /i? bHow did they doso? bRabbi Yehuda saidthat bthey recited: “Hear Israel: The Lord is our God, the Lord is One /b” (Deuteronomy 6:4), band they would not pausebetween words. bRava said: Theywould bpausebetween words, bbutinstead of reciting this verse in the proper manner: “That which I command you today, shall be on your heart” (Deuteronomy 6:5), pausing after the word today; bthey would say: Today shall be on your heart,inferring: bToday it will be on your heart, and tomorrow it will not be on your heart. The Sages taughtin the iTosefta /i: bHow would they bundle iShema /i? They recited: “Hear Israel, the Lord is our God the Lord is One,” without pausing;this is bthe statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda says: They paused, but they would not recite: Blessed be the name of His glorious kingdom for ever and ever. /b,The Gemara asks: bWhat is the reason that we recitethat passage: Blessed be the name of His glorious kingdom for ever and ever, even though it does not appear in the Torah? The Gemara answers: We recite it bin accordance withthat bwhich Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish interpreted homiletically. /b, bAs Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish saidthat it is written: b“And Jacob called his sons and said, Gather around and I will tell youwhat will occur to you in the end of days” (Genesis 49:1). bJacob wanted to reveal to his sonswhen the complete redemption would arrive at bthe end of days(see Daniel 12:13), bbut the Divine Presence abandoned him,rendering him unable to prophesy. bHe said: Perhapsthe Divine Presence has abandoned me because, bHeaven forfend, one of my descendants is unfit, aswas the case with my grandfather bAbraham, from whom Ishmael emerged, andlike bmy father Isaac, from whom Esau emerged. His sons said to him: Hear Israel,our father, bthe Lord is our God, the Lord is One. They said: Just as there is only oneGod bin your heart, so too, there is only one in our hearts. At that moment Jacob our father saidin praise: bBlessed be the name of His glorious kingdom for ever and ever,as all his children were righteous., bThe Rabbis said: What should we do? Shall we recitethis verse? But bMoses our teacher did not say itin the Torah as part of iShema /i. bShall we not recite it?But bJacob said it.In order to resolve this dilemma bthey established thatthis passage bshould be recited surreptitiously. Rabbi Yitzḥak saidthat bthe school of Rabbi Ami said:This is banalogous to the daughter of a king who smelledthe fragrance of the dried bspicesstuck to the bottom of bthe potand craved to eat them. What can she do? bIf she tellsher servants to give it to her, bshe will be disgraced,as the dried spices are a contemptible food. However, if bshe does not sayshe wants to eat them, bshe willendure bsuffering. Her servants began to bringthem to her bsurreptitiously.One should conduct himself in that manner in similar cases of uncertainty., bRabbi Abbahu said:The Sages binstituted thatthe people bshould recite it aloud due to the grievance of the heretics.It was instituted to prevent the heretics from claiming that the Jews are surreptitiously reciting inappropriate statements. The Gemara adds: bIn Neharde’a, where there are no heretics, they recite it surreptitiously even now. /b, bThe Sages taughta related matter in the iTosefta /i: bThe people of Jericho performed six actions, threein keeping bwith the will of the Sages and three against the will of the Sages. And theseare what they did in keeping bwith the will of the Sages: Theywould bgraft palm trees the entire dayof the fourteenth of Nisan; band theywould bbundle iShema /i; and theywould bharvestgrain bbefore the iomer /ioffering was brought. bAnd theseare what they did bagainst the will of the Sages: Theywould bpilethe harvest bbefore the iomer /i; and theywould bmake breaches inthe walls of btheir gardens and their orchards to feed fallenfruit bto the poor during drought years,so that the poor could take the fruit that had fallen bon Shabbat and Festivals; and theywould bpermitthe use of bconsecrated branches of carob and of sycamoretrees. This is bthe statement of Rabbi Meir. /b, bRabbi Yehuda said to him:It is inaccurate to formulate it in that manner, as bif they actedin keeping bwith the will of the Sages, all people would do so,not only the residents of Jericho. bRather,formulate it in this manner: Both bthesethree acts band thosethree bwere performed against the will of the Sages. With regard to threethe Sages breprimanded them; and with regard to threethe Sages bdid not reprimand them.Since one could contend that the latter are permitted and the people of Jericho had already performed them, the Sages chose not to reprimand them., bAnd theseare what they did for which the Sages bdid not reprimand them: Theywould bgraft palm trees the entire day; and theywould bbundle iShema /i; and theywould bharvest and pilegrain bbefore the iomer /ioffering was brought. bAnd theseare what they did for which the Sages breprimanded them: Theywould bpermitthe use of bconsecrated branches of carob and of sycamoretrees; btheywould bmake breaches inthe walls of btheir gardens and orchards on Shabbat and Festivals, in order to feed the poor fallen fruit during drought years; and theywould bdesignatefor the poor btheproduce in the bcornerin a field of bvegetables. And the Sages reprimanded themfor those actions.,The Gemara asks: bAnddoes bRabbi Yehuda maintainthat this bharvestperformed by the residents of Jericho bwas against the will of the Sages? Didn’t we learnin a mishna: bThe people of Jerichowould bharvest before the iomer /i,in keeping bwith the will of the Sages, and theywould bpilethe grain bbefore the iomer /i, against the will of the Sages, but the Sages did not reprimand them? /b |
|
28. Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
| 74a. רב פפא אמר במפותה ודברי הכל,אביי אמר ביכול להציל באחד מאבריו ורבי יונתן בן שאול היא דתניא רבי יונתן בן שאול אומר רודף שהיה רודף אחר חבירו להורגו ויכול להצילו באחד מאבריו ולא הציל נהרג עליו,מאי טעמא דרבי יונתן בן שאול דכתיב (שמות כא, כב) וכי ינצו אנשים (יחדו) וגו' וא"ר אלעזר במצות שבמיתה הכתוב מדבר דכתיב (שמות כא, כג) ואם אסון יהיה ונתתה נפש תחת נפש ואפ"ה אמר רחמנא ולא יהיה אסון ענוש יענש,אי אמרת בשלמא יכול להציל באחד מאבריו לא ניתן להצילו בנפשו היינו דמשכחת לה דיענש כגון שיכול להציל באחד מאבריו,אלא אי אמרת יכול להציל באחד מאבריו נמי ניתן להצילו בנפשו היכי משכחת לה דיענש,דילמא שאני הכא דמיתה לזה ותשלומין לזה,לא שנא דאמר רבא רודף שהיה רודף אחר חבירו ושיבר את הכלים בין של נרדף ובין של כל אדם פטור מאי טעמא מתחייב בנפשו הוא,ונרדף ששיבר את הכלים של רודף פטור של כל אדם חייב של רודף פטור שלא יהא ממונו חביב עליו מגופו של כל אדם חייב שמציל עצמו בממון חבירו,ורודף שהיה רודף אחר רודף להצילו ושיבר את הכלים בין של רודף בין של נרדף בין של כל אדם פטור ולא מן הדין שאם אי אתה אומר כן נמצא אין לך כל אדם שמציל את חבירו מיד הרודף:,אבל הרודף אחר בהמה: תניא רשב"י אומר העובד עבודת כוכבים ניתן להצילו בנפשו מק"ו ומה פגם הדיוט ניתן להצילו בנפשו פגם גבוה לא כל שכן וכי עונשין מן הדין קא סבר עונשין מן הדין,תניא רבי אלעזר ברבי שמעון אומר המחלל את השבת ניתן להצילו בנפשו סבר לה כאבוה דאמר עונשין מן הדין ואתיא שבת בחילול חילול מעבודת כוכבים,א"ר יוחנן משום ר"ש בן יהוצדק נימנו וגמרו בעליית בית נתזה בלוד כל עבירות שבתורה אם אומרין לאדם עבור ואל תהרג יעבור ואל יהרג חוץ מעבודת כוכבים וגילוי עריות ושפיכות דמים,ועבודת כוכבים לא והא תניא א"ר ישמעאל מנין שאם אמרו לו לאדם עבוד עבודת כוכבים ואל תהרג מנין שיעבוד ואל יהרג ת"ל (ויקרא יח, ה) וחי בהם ולא שימות בהם,יכול אפילו בפרהסיא תלמוד לומר (ויקרא כב, לב) ולא תחללו את שם קדשי ונקדשתי,אינהו דאמור כר"א דתניא ר"א אומר (דברים ו, ה) ואהבת את ה' אלהיך בכל לבבך ובכל נפשך ובכל מאדך אם נאמר בכל נפשך למה נאמר בכל מאדך ואם נאמר בכל מאדך למה נאמר בכל נפשך,אם יש לך אדם שגופו חביב עליו מממונו לכך נאמר בכל נפשך ואם יש לך אדם שממונו חביב עליו מגופו לכך נאמר בכל מאדך,גילוי עריות ושפיכות דמים כדרבי דתניא רבי אומר (דברים כב, כו) כי כאשר יקום איש על רעהו ורצחו נפש כן הדבר הזה וכי מה למדנו מרוצח,מעתה הרי זה בא ללמד ונמצא למד מקיש רוצח לנערה המאורסה מה נערה המאורסה ניתן להצילו בנפשו אף רוצח ניתן להצילו בנפשו,ומקיש נערה המאורסה לרוצח מה רוצח יהרג ואל יעבור אף נערה המאורסה תהרג ואל תעבור,רוצח גופיה מנא לן סברא הוא דההוא דאתא לקמיה דרבה ואמר ליה אמר לי מרי דוראי זיל קטליה לפלניא ואי לא קטלינא לך אמר ליה לקטלוך ולא תיקטול מי יימר דדמא דידך סומק טפי דילמא דמא דהוא גברא סומק טפי,כי אתא רב דימי א"ר יוחנן לא שנו אלא שלא בשעת גזרת המלכות) אבל בשעת גזרת המלכות אפי' מצוה קלה יהרג ואל יעבור,כי אתא רבין א"ר יוחנן אפי' שלא בשעת גזרת מלכות לא אמרו אלא בצינעא אבל בפרהסיא אפי' מצוה קלה יהרג ואל יעבור,מאי מצוה קלה אמר רבא בר רב יצחק אמר רב | 74a. bRav Pappa says:The ruling of the mishna, which lists his sister among those for whom he must pay a fine, is stated bwith regard toa young woman who was bseduced, andin the case of seduction ball agreethat the woman is not saved at the cost of the seducer’s life, as the intercourse was consensual., bAbaye says:The ruling of the mishna is stated bwith regard toa young woman who was raped in a case bwhereone was bable to saveher by injuring the pursuer bin one of his limbs,so that it was not necessary to kill him in order to achieve her rescue, band it isin accordance with the opinion of bRabbi Yonatan ben Shaul. As it is taughtin a ibaraita /i: bRabbi Yonatan ben Shaul says:If ba pursuer was pursuing another to kill him, andone was bable to savethe pursued party without killing the pursuer, but instead by injuring him bin one of his limbs, but he did not save himin this manner and rather chose to kill him, bhe is executed on his accountas a murderer.,The Gemara explains: bWhat is the reason of Rabbi Yonatan ben Shaul? As it is written: “If men striveand strike a woman with child, so that her fruit departs, and yet no further harm ensues, he shall be punished, according to the demands that the woman’s husband makes on him; and he shall pay it as the judges determine” (Exodus 21:22). bAndconcerning this bRabbi Elazar says: The verse is speaking of striving to kill,where each man was trying to kill the other. The proof is bthat it is written: “But if any harm ensues, then you shall give life for life”(Exodus 21:23), and if there was no intention to kill, why should he be executed? bAnd even so, the Merciful One states: “And yet no further harm ensues, he shall be punished,”teaching that he must pay the monetary value of the fetus to the woman’s husband., bGranted, if you saythat in a case where one is bable to savethe pursued party by injuring the pursuer bin one of his limbs, he may not savethe pursued party batthe cost of the pursuer’s blife,and if he killed the pursuer rather than injure him he is liable to receive the death penalty, bthat is how you findthe possibility bthatthe one who ultimately struck the woman bwould be punished.This would be in a case bwhere it was possible to savethe man under attack, i.e., one of the men who were fighting, by injuring the pursuer, i.e., the other man, who ultimately struck the woman, bin one of his limbs.In this case, the one who ultimately struck the woman was not subject to being killed. Therefore, he is subject to pay a fine., bBut if you saythat even if one is bable to savethe pursued party by injuring the pursuer bin one of his limbs, he can also save him atthe cost of the pursuer’s blife, how can you findthe possibility bthatthe one who ultimately struck the woman bwould be punished?When he was going to strike the other man, he was at risk of being killed, as anybody could have killed him at that time, and the ihalakhais that anybody who commits an act warranting death exempts himself from any monetary obligation ensuing from that act.,The Gemara tries to refute this reasoning: bPerhaps it is different here becausehis two liabilities are not on account of the same person; rather, his liability to be put to bdeath is on account of thisperson, the man with whom he fought, bwhilehis liability to give bpayment is on account of thatperson, the woman he ultimately struck. Consequently, he is liable to receive both punishments.,The Gemara rejects this distinction: There bis no difference. As Rava says:If ba pursuer was pursuing anotherto kill him, bandduring the course of the chase the pursuer bbroke vesselsbelonging beither to the person being pursued or to anyone else,he is bexemptfrom paying for the broken vessels. bWhat is the reasonfor this? The reason is that bhe is liable to be killed,since everyone is entitled to kill him in order to save the victim’s life, and one who commits an act rendering himself liable to be killed is exempt from any monetary obligation arising from that act, even if the payment were to be made to a person not connected to the act for which he is liable to be killed.,Rava continues: bAndif bthe pursuedparty bbroke vesselswhile fleeing from the pursuer, if those vessels bbelonged to the pursuer,the pursued party is bexempt.But if they bbelonged to anyoneelse, he is bliableto pay for them. The Gemara explains: If the vessels bbelonged to the pursuer,he is bexempt.The reason for this is bso that thepursuer’s bproperty should not be more precious tothe pursuer bthan hisown bbody.Were the one being pursued to cause the pursuer bodily harm, he would be exempt; all the more so when the pursued one breaks the pursuer’s vessels. And if the vessels belonged bto anyoneelse, he is bliable, as he saved himself atthe expense of banother’s property,and that other person should not have to suffer a loss on his account.,Rava continues: bButif one bpursuer was pursuinganother bpursuerin order bto save him,i.e., if he was trying to save the person being pursued by killing the pursuer, bandwhile doing so bhe broke vesselsbelonging beither to the pursuer or to the one being pursued, or to anyoneelse, he is bexemptfrom paying for them. The Gemara comments: This bis not bystrict blaw,as if one who saves himself at another’s expense is liable to pay for the damage, certainly one who saves another at the expense of a third party should bear similar liability. Rather, it is an ordice instituted by the Sages. This is bbecause if you do not saythat he is exempt, it will bbe found that no person will save another from a pursuer,as everyone will be afraid of becoming liable to pay for damage caused in the course of saving the pursued party.,§ The mishna teaches: bButwith regard to bone who pursues an animalto sodomize it, or one who seeks to desecrate Shabbat, or one who is going to engage in idol worship, they are not saved at the cost of their lives. bIt is taughtin a ibaraita /i: bRabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai says: One whoseeks to bworship idols may be savedfrom transgressing batthe cost of bhis life.This is derived bthrough an ia fortiori /iinference: bIfto avoid bthe degradation of an ordinaryperson, such as in the case of a rapist who degrades his victim, bhe can be savedeven batthe cost of bhis life, all the more sois it bnotclear that one may kill the transgressor to avoid bthe degrading ofthe honor of bGodthrough the worship of idols? The Gemara asks: bBut doesthe court badminister punishmentbased bonan ia fortiori binference?The Gemara answers: Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai bmaintainsthat the court badministers punishmentbased bonan ia fortiori binference. /b, bIt is taughtin a ibaraita /i: bRabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, says: One whoseeks to bdesecrate Shabbat may be savedfrom transgressing even batthe cost of bhis life.The Gemara explains that Rabbi Elazar bholds in accordance withthe opinion of bhis father,Rabbi Shimon, bwho says:The court badministers punishmentbased bonan ia fortiori binference, andthe ihalakhawith regard to one who desecrates bShabbat is derived fromthe ihalakhawith regard to bidol worshipby way of a verbal analogy between the word b“desecration”mentioned in the context of Shabbat and the word b“desecration”mentioned in the context of idol worship.,§ The Gemara now considers which prohibitions are permitted in times of mortal danger. bRabbi Yoḥa says in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak:The Sages who discussed this issue bcountedthe votes of those assembled band concluded in the upper story of the house of Nitza inthe city of bLod:With regard to ballother btransgressions in the Torah, if a person is told: Transgressthis prohibition band you will not be killed, he may transgressthat prohibition band not be killed,because the preserving of his own life overrides all of the Torah’s prohibitions. This is the ihalakhaconcerning all prohibitions bexcept forthose of bidol worship, forbidden sexual relations, and bloodshed.Concerning those prohibitions, one must allow himself to be killed rather than transgress them.,The Gemara asks: bAndshould one bnottransgress the prohibition of bidol worshipto save his life? bBut isn’t it taughtin a ibaraita /i: bRabbi Yishmael said: From whereis it derived bthat if a person is told: Worship idols and you will not be killed, from whereis it derived bthat he should worshipthe idol band not be killed? The verse states:“You shall keep My statutes and My judgments, which a person shall do, band he shall live by them”(Leviticus 18:5), thereby teaching that the mitzvot were given to provide life, bbutthey were bnotgiven so bthatone will bdie due to theirobservance.,The ibaraitacontinues: One bmighthave thought that it is permitted to worship the idol in this circumstance beven in public,i.e., in the presence of many people. Therefore, bthe verse states: “Neither shall you profane My holy name; but I will be hallowedamong the children of Israel: I am the Lord Who sanctifies you” (Leviticus 22:32). Evidently, one is not required to allow himself to be killed so as not to transgress the prohibition of idol worship when in private; but in public he must allow himself to be killed rather than transgress.,The Gemara answers: bThosein the upper story of the house of Nitza bstatedtheir opinion bin accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Eliezer. As it is taughtin a ibaraitathat bRabbi Eliezer says:It is stated: b“And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your might”(Deuteronomy 6:5). bIf it is stated: “With all your soul,” why is italso bstated: “With all your might,”which indicates with all your material possessions? bAnd if it is stated: “With all your might,” why is italso bstated: “With all your soul”?One of these clauses seems to be superfluous.,Rather, this serves to teach that bif you have a person whose body is more precious to him than his property, it is therefore stated: “With all your soul.”That person must be willing to sacrifice even his life to sanctify God’s name. bAnd if you have a person whose property is more precious to him than his body, it is therefore stated: “With all your might.”That person must even be prepared to sacrifice all his property for the love of God. According to the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer, one must allow himself to be killed rather than worship an idol.,From where is it derived that one must allow himself to be killed rather than transgress the prohibition of bforbidden sexual relations andthe prohibition of bbloodshed?This is bin accordance withthe opinion bof RabbiYehuda HaNasi. bAs it is taughtin a ibaraita /i: bRabbiYehuda HaNasi bsays:With regard to the rape of a betrothed young woman it is written: “But you shall do nothing to the young woman; the young woman has committed no sin worthy of death; bfor as when a man rises against his neighbor, and slays him,so too with this matter” (Deuteronomy 22:26). But why would the verse mention murder in this context? bBut what do we learnhere bfrom a murderer? /b, bNow,the mention of murder bcamein order bto teacha ihalakhaabout the betrothed young woman, band it turns outthat, in addition, bit derivesa ihalakhafrom that case. The Torah bjuxtaposesthe case of ba murderer tothe case of ba betrothed young womanto indicate that bjust asin the case of a betrothed young woman bone may save her atthe cost of the rapist’s blife, so too,in the case of ba murderer, one may savethe potential victim batthe cost of the murderer’s blife. /b, bAndconversely, the Torah bjuxtaposes a betrothed young woman to a murdererto indicate that bjust aswith regard to a potential bmurderer,the ihalakhais that if one was ordered to murder another, bhe must be killed and not transgressthe prohibition of bloodshed, bso too,with regard to ba betrothed young woman,if she is faced with rape, bshe must be killed and not transgressthe prohibition of forbidden sexual relations.,The Gemara asks: bFrom where do wederive this ihalakhawith regard to ba murderer himself,that one must allow himself to be killed rather than commit murder? The Gemara answers: bIt isbased on blogical reasoningthat one life is not preferable to another, and therefore there is no need for a verse to teach this ihalakha /i. The Gemara relates an incident to demonstrate this: bAswhen ba certain person came before Rabba and said to him: The lord of my place,a local official, bsaid to me: Go kill so-and-so, and if not I will kill you,what shall I do? Rabba bsaid to him:It is preferable that bhe should kill you and you should not kill. Who is to say that your blood is redderthan his, that your life is worth more than the one he wants you to kill? bPerhaps that man’s blood is redder.This logical reasoning is the basis for the ihalakhathat one may not save his own life by killing another.,§ bWhen Rav Dimi camefrom Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, bhe saidthat bRabbi Yoḥasaid: The Sages btaughtthat one is permitted to transgress prohibitions in the face of mortal danger bonly when it is not a time ofreligious bpersecution. But in a time ofreligious bpersecution,when the gentile authorities are trying to force Jews to violate their religion, bevenif they issued a decree about ba minor mitzva, one must be killed and not transgress. /b, bWhen Ravin camefrom Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said that bRabbi Yoḥa said: Even whenit is bnot a time ofreligious bpersecution,the Sages bsaidthat one is permitted to transgress a prohibition in the face of mortal danger bonlywhen he was ordered to do so bin private. Butif he was ordered to commit a transgression bin public, evenif they threaten him with death if he does not transgress ba minor mitzva, he must be killed and not transgress. /b,The Gemara asks: bWhat is a minor mitzvafor this purpose? bRava bar Yitzḥak saysthat bRav says: /b |
|
