Talmud Builders

    Commentary page

    Sanhedrin 56b

    This page gathers the commentary on one source unit: the classic commentaries as they are printed, the sources the text cites, the sages named in it and direct links back to the text.

    Read the full text in the reader
    Babylonian Talmud · folio map

    Sanhedrin 56b

    Sanhedrin 56b. The full printed text of this folio side — 26 numbered segments, about 611 words — with the classic commentaries printed on the page.

    Rashi

    אף על הדם מן החי כולהו יליף טעמייהו לקמן:

    בפרשת מכשף זו היא שמזכיר והולך לא ימצא בך ובגלל התועבות האל וגו' ומדנענשו עליהם שמע מינה הוזהרו על כולם דלא ענש אלא אם כן הזהיר:

    מותרין בני נח וכו' סיפא דמילתא דרבי אלעזר הוא וכוליה מפרש לקמן:

    מכל עץ הגן ולא גזל מדאיצטריך למישרי ליה ולהפקיר לו עצי הגן ש"מ שאינו מופקר לו נאסר לו:

    אכול תאכל העומד לאכילה ולא תאכל אבר מן החי דבהמה בחייה אינה עומדת לאכילה אלא לגדל ולדות:

    עשוק אפרים מיד שונאיו ורצוץ משפט רצוץ ע"י שפטיו של הקב"ה:

    כי הואיל הלך אחרי צו מפני שנתרצה ללכת אחרי צווי של נביאי הבעל:

    למעוטי גיפוף ונישוק אבל עשה אתרבי מויצו אע"ג דבית דין של ישראל אין ממיתין:

    23 more comments on this page.

    Rashi on Sanhedrin 56b · Sefaria

    Tosafot

    לאמר הן ישלח אע"ג דהאי קרא במחזיר גרושתו כתיב ובני נח לא הוזהרו בה מ"מ מייתי ראיה דגבי אישות כתיב לאמר:

    אכל תאכל ולא אבר מן החי והא דאמרינן לקמן (סנהדרין דף נט:) דלא הותר לאדם הראשון בשר לאכילה היינו להמית ולאכול אבל מתה מאליה שריא ואתא לאפוקי אבר מן החי דאפי' נפל מאליו אסור:

    עשר מצות תימה הא איכא גיד הנשה למ"ד (בחולין דף ק:) לבני יעקב. אסר ומילה שניתן לאברהם אבינו:

    לא נצטווה אלא על ע"ז מה שנאסר לו בשר ועץ הדעת לא קחשיב לפי שלא היה נוהג לדורות ודוקא אדם הראשון קאמר אבל מודה רבי יהודה דבני נח נצטוו אחר המבול דהא אמר בפרק ג"ה (חולין דף ק:) לרבי יהודה גבי אבר מן החי דאתי איסור אבר מן החי וחייל אאיסור טומאה שכן איסורו נוהג בבני נח:

    Tosafot on Sanhedrin 56b · Sefaria

    Rabbeinu Chananel

    ת"ר שבע מצות נצטוו בני נח כו' עד ר' יוסי אומר כל האמור בפרשת מכשף בן נח מוזהר עליו שנאמר לא ימצא בך מעביר בנו ובתו באש קוסם קסמי' מעונן ומנחש ומכשף וחובר חבר ושואל אוב וידעוני ודורש אל המתים. וכתוב ובגלל התועבות האלה ה' אלהיך מוריש אותם מפניך ואינו מענישם בתועבות הללו אלא שבוודאי הזהירן בהן שאין הקב"ה מעניש אלא אם כן הזהיר ר' אליעזר אומר אף על הרכבת האילן והרכבת הבהמה נצטוו אבל מותרין ללבוש כלאים ולזרוע כלאים מנא הני מילי א"ר יוחנן דכתיב ויצו ה' אלהים על האדם. ויצו אלו הדינין ה' זו ברכת השם אלהים זו ע"ז. על האדם זו שפיכות דמים. מכל עץ הגן אכול תאכל ולא גזל תאכל ולא אבר מן החי. ר' יצחק תני איפכא ויצו זו ע"ז כו' וזה וזה מביא ראיה מקראי. ואקשינן דינין בני נח נצטוו עליהן והתניא עשר מצות נצטוו ישראל במרה. ז' שקבלו עליהן בני נח. הוסיפו עליהן דינין ושבת וכבוד אב ואם. דינין שנאמר שם שם לו חק ומשפט ושבת וכיבוד אב ואם דבתרייהו כתיב כאשר צוך ה' אלהיך ואמר ר' יהודה כאשר צוך במרה ופריק ר"נ לעולם הדינין בני נח נצטוו עליהן ומה הוסיפו במרה שיהו דינין בעדה ע"פ שנים עדים והתראה. ודחינן אי הכי מאי והוסיפו עליהן דינין. ונדחה. וגם פירוק של רבא ושל רב אחא בר יעקב:

    Rabbeinu Chananel on Sanhedrin 56b · Sefaria

    Meiri

    The seven commandments that the Noahides were commanded, for each of which they are executed if violated, are: establishing courts of law, blasphemy, idolatry, sexual immorality, murder, theft, and eating flesh from a living animal. The first six were commanded from the time of Adam, and the prohibition of eating flesh from a living animal was added from the time of Noah, as it is stated, “But flesh with its life, its blood, you shall not eat” (Genesis 9:4). The prohibition of eating meat from a living animal includes all its flesh, but Noahides are permitted to consume the blood of a living animal. Likewise, castration, even though it is similar to removing a limb from a living creature, is permitted for them. Similarly, the pagan practices of divination, sorcery, and consulting the dead—even though these are idolatrous customs—are permitted for them, despite the verse stating, “Because of these abominations, the Lord your God is driving them out before you” (Deuteronomy 18:12). If so, why were they punished for engaging in these practices if they were not prohibited? Rather, it is because these practices are a gateway to idolatry, which is why they were punished. This is what was stated later regarding idolatry, that Gentiles are punished for engaging in these things.

    Noahides are forbidden from crossbreeding animals of different species, as well as from grafting trees of different species. However, these are not included among the seven Noahide laws, and they are not executed for them. Other forms of forbidden mixtures are permitted for them.

    A Noahide is not executed for idolatry unless he worships it in the manner that an Israelite would be executed for it—such as worshiping it in its customary manner, meaning the way it is traditionally worshiped, or by performing one of the four primary acts of worship (sacrificing, burning incense, pouring libations, or bowing). Even if the idol is not traditionally worshiped in that manner, as will be explained later in this chapter, if he did so, he is liable. However, if he worshiped it in a manner that is not customary and not one of the four primary acts—such as hugging or kissing it and similar actions that are not part of its normal service—he is exempt, though it remains prohibited for him just as it is for an Israelite. Similarly, he is prohibited from erecting a monument, planting an Asherah tree, or making images even for decoration, let alone for worship. However, if he only made them but did not worship them, he is exempt, since an Israelite is not executed for making them but only receives lashes, and lashes do not apply to Noahides. The principle that “their prohibition is their death penalty” applies only to those prohibitions explicitly commanded to them, not to those derived from Israelite law. Some explain the principle that “their prohibition is their death penalty” to mean that whenever the Mishnah states that Noahides are prohibited from something, it implies that they are liable for the death penalty, as it does not use the term "prohibition" in a general sense.

    An Israelite is only executed with a court of twenty-three judges, with valid witnesses and prior warning. However, a Noahide does not require all of these; he is executed based on a single judge and a single witness, even if the witness is a relative, though not based on the testimony of a woman. It appears to me that he is also not executed based on the testimony of those disqualified from giving testimony under Torah law.

    Noahides are obligated to establish courts of law in every district and in every city, just as Israel was commanded, so that they will have fixed courts to judge cases concerning these seven commandments and to admonish their people regarding them. Since they were commanded in this, if they see someone transgressing and do not judge him, they are all executed. This is the reason why the people of Shechem were liable to be killed—not because of sexual immorality, since the woman was unmarried, but because of theft. As it is stated, “Shall he treat our sister like a harlot?” (Genesis 34:31), and the great rabbinic authorities wrote in their commentaries that “like a harlot” means that he treated her as ownerless, meaning that he would not be liable for theft. Thus, Shechem was guilty of theft, and they saw and did not judge him. This is the opinion of the great commentators. However, some leading scholars of later generations dispute this, saying that the obligation to establish courts for Noahides is only a positive commandment, and when it is said that “their prohibition is their death penalty,” this does not apply to positive commandments. According to their opinion, the killing of the people of Shechem was unjustified, and this is why Jacob cursed them. However, in my view, the obligation to establish courts is included in the commandment of “justice,” which prohibits wrongdoing and violence, and thus it is a prohibition, not just a positive commandment. Jacob did not curse them for acting unjustly, but because he had made an agreement with them and wanted to maintain his word and their treaty, going beyond the strict letter of the law. A proof for my view is what is stated later, that a Gentile who rests on the Sabbath is liable for the death penalty, as it is written, “Day and night they shall not cease” (Genesis 8:22). The Talmud asks why this is not included among the seven commandments and answers that the list only includes prohibitions of inaction, whereas this is an active prohibition. The Talmud then questions why the obligation to establish courts is included, since it is an active commandment, and answers that it includes both an active and a passive prohibition, meaning preventing wrongdoing, as it is written, “You shall not commit injustice” (Leviticus 19:15). Any means that leads to enforcing justice is therefore included.

    Noahides are commanded regarding both strict judgment and compromise, as it is stated, “To do righteousness and justice” (Genesis 18:19). It has already been explained that "righteousness" refers to compromise. However, they do not have monetary fines, nor are they permitted to judge cases involving fines.

    Noahides are warned against eating a limb from a living animal, whether from a kosher or non-kosher species. This is different from Israelites, for whom the prohibition applies only to kosher species, as we explained in Tractate Chullin. The prohibition of a limb from a living animal applies to domesticated animals, wild animals, and birds— for Israelites, it applies only to kosher species, but for Noahides, it applies even to non-kosher species, since those species are still considered "permissible" to them. However, the prohibition does not apply to creeping creatures (sheratzim), neither for Israelites nor for Noahides. An Israelite does not receive lashes for eating an entire limb from a creeping creature; rather, the prohibition applies only if he eats an olive-sized portion while the creature is alive and a lentil-sized portion after its death, as explained in Tractate Meilah. Even though creeping creatures are considered "permissible" to Noahides, it appears that the prohibition of a limb from a living animal does not apply to them. Some major scholars wrote that, in their view, a Noahide is not liable for execution for eating a limb from a living bird. However, this is puzzling, and other leading scholars believe this is a scribal error and that the original intent was to refer to a limb from a creeping creature. Even though creeping creatures are permissible to Noahides, an Israelite is not punished for eating flesh from a living animal unless he eats an olive-sized portion, whereas a Noahide is executed even for eating the smallest amount. This is because all measurements of prohibited food quantities apply only to Israelites. It was clarified in Tractate Chullin that if an Israelite slaughters an animal by cutting both of its simanim (the trachea and esophagus), but the animal is still convulsing, it is forbidden to Noahides under the prohibition of eating a limb from a living animal. However, for an Israelite, it is permitted since the animal has undergone proper ritual slaughter.

    Meiri on Sanhedrin 56b · Sefaria · CC0

    Maharsha (Chidushei Halachot)

    גמרא למאן דאמר עשו משעת עשייה מחייב כו' אע"ג דהאי עשו בישראל כתיב ובישראל גופיה אין ממיתין על העשייה מכל מקום ויצו בעכו"ם כתיב דמיניה נילף העשייה מה שאין כן לעיל בההיא דאיש איש דכולו נכתב בישראל ולא גמרינן מיתה לעכו"ם בכינויין כיון דבישראל ליכא מיתה וק"ל:

    שם רבי יהודה בן בתירא אומר אף על ברכת השם כו' אלהים אני לא תקללוני כו' קצת קשה אמאי קאמר דרבי יצחק נפחא פליג אדרבי מיישא וסבירא ליה אליבא דרבנן דעכו"ם אינו חייב על הכינויין כיון דסבירא ליה דאיש איש לרבות כנוייך אליבא דרבי מאיר וכמו שכתבו התוס' לעיל דהא אכתי אימא דלרבי יצחק נפחא עכו"ם נמי חייב על הכנויין וסבירא ליה כרבי יהודה בן בתירא דיליף ברכת השם מאלהים דכנויין נמי במשמע ויש לומר דמכל מקום פליג אדרבי מיישא דיליף ליה כנויין מכגר ואזרח לרבנן ורבי יצחק נפחא לרבנן יליף ליה מאלהים כרבי יהודה בן בתירא ומיהו כיון דבישראל אכנויין אינה רק באזהרה ומאלהים דכתיב באדם הראשון יליף ליה לא מקרי אתרבו לרבנן ולא איצטריך לדידהו למעט סקילה כמו לרבי מאיר דקאמר כיון דאתרבו אתרבו ולכך אצטריך ליה לרבי יצחק נפחא למימר דכגר ואזרח אתא למעט שם בשם ודו"ק:

    שם אי לא דריש ויצו הני מנא ליה כו' ולא ניחא ליה לתלמודא למימר דהני שתי תיבות ויצו ה' לא דריש לדינין וברכת השם וכל אינך דריש כדלעיל כיון דדריש סיפיה דקרא אמאי לא דריש רישא דקרא ועוד דסירוס וכלאים ע"כ באנפיה נפשיה דריש ניחא ליה למימר הכי באינך וק"ל:

    בפירש"י בד"ה דיני קנסות כו' צדקה ומשפט כתיב דהיינו דין ופשרה כו' עכ"ל הכי אמרינן בפרק קמא דבמקום משפט אין צדקה כו' ועוד דהכא ע"כ צדקה לאו ממש הוא למאי דאסיק אדעתיה לקמן דקום עשה נמי חשיב אמאי לא חשיב נמי צדקה והוי להו שמנה מצות בני נח מיהו לקמן משמע דצדקה ממש קאמר דמשני בניו לדין ביתו לצדקה ולמסקנא דקום עשהלא קחשיב ניחא וק"ל:

    תוס' בד"ה אכל תאכל כו' אבל מתה מאליה שריא ואתא לאפוקי אבר כו' עכ"ל כהאי גוונא תירץ רש"י לקמן אך לא כתב דמתה מאליה שריא ודעת התוספות דאי מתה מאליה לא הוה שריא לא הוה אצטריך קרא לנפל מאליו דאסור ואין להקשות לדבריהם דמתה מאליה שריא מאי קא קשיא ליה לקמן אהא דמלאכי השרת היו צולין לו בשר דאימא מתה מאליה הויא דיש לומר כיון דמתה מאליה הוא דבר טמא ועתידה התורה ליאסר לא היו מתעסקין בו מלאכי השרת וק"ל:

    Chidushei Halachot on Sanhedrin 56b · Sefaria

    Gilyon HaShas

    גמ' ויצו אלו הדינים עי' תשובת רמ"א סימן י':

    שם עץ הגן ולא גזל עי' ב"מ דף ע' ע"ב תוס' ד"ה תשיך:

    Gilyon HaShas on Sanhedrin 56b · Sefaria

    What this page contains

    A full text unit for Sanhedrin, daf 56, Amud Bet, about 611 words in 26 segments. Segment numbers make it easier to return to an exact line; the commentaries below are quoted from their printed sources.

    A unit-by-unit map of all 26 segments on this page: opening words, the moves the text actually makes and a link back to that exact segment.

    1. Segment 122 words

      Opens “רַבִּי חֲנַנְיָה בֶּן גַּמְלָא אוֹמֵר: אַף עַל…”

    2. Segment 247 words

      Opens “רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: כׇּל הָאָמוּר בְּפָרָשַׁת כִּישּׁוּף…”

    3. Segment 320 words

      Opens “רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר: אַף עַל הַכִּלְאַיִם. מוּתָּרִין…”

    4. Segment 418 words

      Opens “מְנָהָנֵי מִילֵּי? אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: דְּאָמַר קְרָא,…”

    5. Segment 515 words

      Opens “״וַיְצַו״ – אֵלּוּ הַדִּינִין, וְכֵן הוּא אוֹמֵר:…”

    6. Segment 639 words

      Opens “״ה׳״ – זוֹ בִּרְכַּת הַשֵּׁם, וְכֵן הוּא…”

    7. Segment 732 words

      Opens “״לֵאמֹר״ – זוֹ גִּילּוּי עֲרָיוֹת, וְכֵן הוּא…”

    8. Segment 815 words

      Opens “כִּי אֲתָא רַבִּי יִצְחָק, תָּנֵי אִיפְּכָא: ״וַיְצַו״…”

    9. Segment 919 words

      Opens “בִּשְׁלָמָא ״אֱלֹהִים״ – זוֹ דִּינִין, דִּכְתִיב: ״וְנִקְרַב…”

    10. Segment 1028 words

      Opens “רַב חִסְדָּא וְרַב יִצְחָק בַּר אַבְדִּימִי: חַד…”

    11. Segment 1129 words

      Opens “מַאי בֵּינַיְיהוּ? אִיכָּא בֵּינַיְיהוּ: גּוֹי שֶׁעָשָׂה עֲבוֹדָה…”

    12. Segment 1254 words

      Opens “אָמַר רָבָא: וּמִי אִיכָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר גּוֹי…”

    13. Segment 137 words

      Opens “אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: לָא, לְמַעוֹטֵי גִּיפּוּף וְנִישּׁוּק.…”

    14. Segment 1413 words

      Opens “גִּיפּוּף וְנִישּׁוּק דְּמַאי? אִילֵּימָא כְּדַרְכָּהּ – בַּר…”

    15. Segment 1522 words

      Opens “דִּינִין בְּנֵי נֹחַ אִיפְּקוּד? וְהָתַנְיָא: עֶשֶׂר מִצְוֹת…”

    16. Segment 1623 words

      Opens “דִּינִין, דִּכְתִיב: ״שָׁם שָׂם לוֹ חֹק וּמִשְׁפָּט״.…”

    17. Segment 1713 words

      Opens “אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר אֲבוּהּ:…”

    18. Segment 186 words

      Opens “אִי הָכִי, מַאי ״וְהוֹסִיפוּ עֲלֵיהֶן דִּינִין״?…”

    19. Segment 1913 words

      Opens “אֶלָּא אָמַר רָבָא: לֹא נִצְרְכָה אֶלָּא לְדִינֵי…”

    20. Segment 2049 words

      Opens “אֶלָּא אָמַר רַב אַחָא בַּר יַעֲקֹב: לֹא…”

    21. Segment 2113 words

      Opens “אֶלָּא אָמַר רָבָא: הַאי תַּנָּא תַּנָּא דְבֵי…”

    22. Segment 2221 words

      Opens “דְּתַנָּא דְבֵי מְנַשֶּׁה: שֶׁבַע מִצְוֹת נִצְטַוּוּ בְּנֵי…”

    23. Segment 2332 words

      Opens “רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: אָדָם הָרִאשׁוֹן לֹא נִצְטַוָּוה…”

    24. Segment 2427 words

      Opens “כְּמַאן אָזְלָא הָא דְּאָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר…”

    25. Segment 2518 words

      Opens “וְתַנָּא דְבֵי מְנַשֶּׁה: אִי דָּרֵישׁ ״וַיְצַו״ –…”

    26. Segment 2616 words

      Opens “לְעוֹלָם לָא דָּרֵישׁ ״וַיְצַו״. הָנֵי, כֹּל חֲדָא…”

    Sages named on this page

    • Rav Aha · Amoraim · Fourth Generation of Amoraim

      Rav Aha, a prominent sage of the fourth generation of Amoraim, served as a Dayan in Lod and was highly influential, contributing…

      Source: Sanhedrin 56b · Segment 20 — “אֶלָּא אָמַר רַב אַחָא בַּר יַעֲקֹב: לֹא נִצְרְכָה אֶלָּא…

    Original text

    רַבִּי חֲנַנְיָה בֶּן גַּמְלָא אוֹמֵר: אַף עַל הַדָּם מִן הַחַי. רַבִּי חִידְקָא אוֹמֵר: אַף עַל הַסֵּירוּס. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: אַף עַל הַכִּישּׁוּף.

    Rabbi Ḥananya ben Gamla says: The descendants of Noah are also commanded concerning the prohibition against consuming the blood from a living animal. Rabbi Ḥideka says: They are also commanded concerning castration, i.e., they are prohibited to castrate any living animal. Rabbi Shimon says: They are also commanded concerning the prohibition against engaging in sorcery.

    רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: כׇּל הָאָמוּר בְּפָרָשַׁת כִּישּׁוּף – בֶּן נֹחַ מוּזְהָר עָלָיו. ״לֹא יִמָּצֵא בְךָ מַעֲבִיר בְּנוֹ וּבִתּוֹ בָּאֵשׁ קֹסֵם קְסָמִים מְעוֹנֵן וּמְנַחֵשׁ וּמְכַשֵּׁף. וְחֹבֵר חָבֶר וְשֹׁאֵל אוֹב וְיִדְּעֹנִי וְדֹרֵשׁ אֶל הַמֵּתִים וְגוֹ׳. וּבִגְלַל הַתּוֹעֵבֹת הָאֵלֶּה ה׳ אֱלֹהֶיךָ מוֹרִישׁ אוֹתָם מִפָּנֶיךָ״. וְלֹא עָנַשׁ אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן הִזְהִיר.

    Rabbi Yosei says: With regard to every type of sorcery that is stated in the passage about sorcery, it is prohibited for a descendant of Noah to engage in it. This is derived from the verses: “When you come into the land that the Lord your God gives you, you shall not learn to do like the abominations of those nations. There shall not be found among you one who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire, a diviner, a soothsayer, or an enchanter, or a warlock, or a charmer, or one who consults a necromancer and a sorcerer, or directs inquiries to the dead. For whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord; and because of these abominations, the Lord your God is driving them out from before you” (Deuteronomy 18:9–12). Evidently, the Canaanites were punished for these practices; and since God would not have punished them for an action unless He first prohibited it, these practices are clearly prohibited to gentiles.

    רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר: אַף עַל הַכִּלְאַיִם. מוּתָּרִין בְּנֵי נֹחַ לִלְבּוֹשׁ כִּלְאַיִם וְלִזְרוֹעַ כִּלְאַיִם, וְאֵין אֲסוּרִין אֶלָּא בְּהַרְבָּעַת בְּהֵמָה וּבְהַרְכָּבַת הָאִילָן.

    Rabbi Elazar says: The descendants of Noah were also commanded concerning the prohibition of diverse kinds. Nevertheless, it is permitted for the descendants of Noah to wear diverse kinds of wool and linen and to sow diverse kinds of seeds together, and they are prohibited only with regard to breeding diverse species of animals and grafting diverse species of trees.

    מְנָהָנֵי מִילֵּי? אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: דְּאָמַר קְרָא, ״וַיְצַו ה׳ אֱלֹהִים עַל הָאָדָם לֵאמֹר מִכֹּל עֵץ הַגָּן אָכֹל תֹּאכֵל״.

    § The Gemara asks: From where are these matters, the Noahide mitzvot, derived? Rabbi Yoḥanan says: It is from that which the verse states: “And the Lord God commanded the man, saying: Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, you shall not eat from it, for on the day that you eat from it, you shall die” (Genesis 2:16–17).

    ״וַיְצַו״ – אֵלּוּ הַדִּינִין, וְכֵן הוּא אוֹמֵר: ״כִּי יְדַעְתִּיו לְמַעַן אֲשֶׁר יְצַוֶּה אֶת בָּנָיו וְגוֹ׳״.

    The verse is interpreted homiletically as follows: With regard to the term “and…commanded,” these are the courts of judgment; and so it states in another verse: “For I have known him, to the end that he may command his children and his household after him, that they may keep the way of the Lord, to do righteousness and justice” (Genesis 18:19).

    ״ה׳״ – זוֹ בִּרְכַּת הַשֵּׁם, וְכֵן הוּא אוֹמֵר: ״וְנֹקֵב שֵׁם ה׳ מוֹת יוּמָת״. ״אֱלֹהִים״ – זוֹ עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, וְכֵן הוּא אוֹמֵר: ״לֹא יִהְיֶה לְךָ אֱלֹהִים אֲחֵרִים״. ״עַל הָאָדָם״ – זוֹ שְׁפִיכוּת דָּמִים, וְכֵן הוּא אוֹמֵר: ״שֹׁפֵךְ דַּם הָאָדָם וְגוֹ׳״.

    With regard to the term “the Lord,” this alludes to blessing the name of God; and so it states in another verse: “And he who blasphemes the name of the Lord…shall be put to death” (Leviticus 24:16). “God,” this alludes to idol worship; and so it states: “You shall have no other gods before Me” (Exodus 20:2). “The man,” this alludes to bloodshed; and so it states: “One who sheds the blood of man, by man his blood shall be shed” (Genesis 9:6).

    ״לֵאמֹר״ – זוֹ גִּילּוּי עֲרָיוֹת, וְכֵן הוּא אוֹמֵר: ״לֵאמֹר הֵן יְשַׁלַּח אִישׁ אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ וְהָלְכָה מֵאִתּוֹ וְהָיְתָה לְאִישׁ אַחֵר״. ״מִכֹּל עֵץ הַגָּן״ – וְלֹא גָּזֵל. ״אָכֹל תֹּאכֵל״ – וְלֹא אֵבֶר מִן הַחַי.

    With regard to the term “saying,” this alludes to forbidden sexual relations; and so it states: “Saying, if a man sends his wife, and she goes from him and becomes another man’s… will that land not be greatly polluted? But you have played the harlot with many lovers” (Jeremiah 3:1). “Of every tree of the garden” alludes to the fact that one may partake only of items that are permitted to him, as they belong to him, and he may not partake of stolen items. “You may freely eat” alludes to the fact that one may eat fruit, but not a limb from a living animal.

    כִּי אֲתָא רַבִּי יִצְחָק, תָּנֵי אִיפְּכָא: ״וַיְצַו״ – זוֹ עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, ״אֱלֹהִים״ – זוֹ דִּינִין.

    When Rav Yitzḥak came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he taught two of the expositions in the opposite order: “And…commanded,” this alludes to idol worship. “God,” this alludes to courts of judgment.

    בִּשְׁלָמָא ״אֱלֹהִים״ – זוֹ דִּינִין, דִּכְתִיב: ״וְנִקְרַב בַּעַל הַבַּיִת אֶל הָאֱלֹהִים״. אֶלָּא ״וַיְצַו״ – זוֹ עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, מַאי מַשְׁמַע?

    The Gemara asks: Granted, the source for the exposition: “God [ Elohim ],” this alludes to courts of judgment, is clear; as it is written: “Then the master of the house shall come near the judges [ ha’elohim ]” (Exodus 22:7). Evidently, judges are called elohim . But with regard to the exposition: “And…commanded,” this alludes to idol worship, from where is this inferred?

    רַב חִסְדָּא וְרַב יִצְחָק בַּר אַבְדִּימִי: חַד אָמַר, ״סָרוּ מַהֵר מִן הַדֶּרֶךְ אֲשֶׁר צִוִּיתִם עָשׂוּ לָהֶם וְגוֹ׳״, וְחַד אָמַר, ״עָשׁוּק אֶפְרַיִם רְצוּץ מִשְׁפָּט כִּי הוֹאִיל הָלַךְ אַחֲרֵי צָו״.

    Rav Ḥisda and Rav Yitzḥak bar Avdimi both give answers to this question. One of them says that it is inferred from the verse: “They have turned aside quickly out of the way that I commanded them; they have made them a molten calf” (Exodus 32:8). The word “commanded” is mentioned here in the context of idol worship. And the other one says that it is inferred from the verse: “Ephraim is oppressed, crushed in justice, because he willingly went after filth [ tzav ]” (Hosea 5:11). The word tzav , used in this context in reference to idol worship, is the same Hebrew word used in the phrase: “And…commanded [ vaytzav ].”

    מַאי בֵּינַיְיהוּ? אִיכָּא בֵּינַיְיהוּ: גּוֹי שֶׁעָשָׂה עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה וְלֹא הִשְׁתַּחֲוָה לָהּ. לְמַאן דְּאָמַר ״עָשׂוּ״ – מִשְּׁעַת עֲשִׂיָּיה מְחַיֵּיב. לְמַאן דְּאָמַר ״כִּי הוֹאִיל הָלַךְ״ – עַד דְּאָזֵיל בָּתְרַהּ וּפָלַח לַהּ.

    The Gemara asks: What is the difference between these two sources? The Gemara answers: The practical difference between them is in the case of a gentile who fashioned an idol but did not bow to it, i.e., he has not yet worshipped it. According to the one who says that the proof is from the verse: “They have made them a molten calf,” he is rendered liable from the time of fashioning it. According to the one who says that the proof is from the verse: “Because he willingly went after filth,” he is not liable until he goes after it and worships it.

    אָמַר רָבָא: וּמִי אִיכָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר גּוֹי שֶׁעָשָׂה עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה וְלֹא הִשְׁתַּחֲוָה לָהּ – חַיָּיב? וְהָתַנְיָא: בַּעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, דְּבָרִים שֶׁבֵּית דִּין שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל מְמִיתִין עֲלֵיהֶן – בֶּן נֹחַ מוּזְהָר עֲלֵיהֶן; אֵין בֵּית דִּין שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל מְמִיתִין עֲלֵיהֶן – אֵין בֶּן נֹחַ מוּזְהָר עֲלֵיהֶן. לְמַעוֹטֵי מַאי? לָאו לְמַעוֹטֵי גּוֹי שֶׁעָשָׂה עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה וְלֹא הִשְׁתַּחֲוָה לָהּ?

    Rava says: And is there anyone who says that a gentile who fashioned an idol but did not bow to it is liable? But isn’t it taught in a baraita : With regard to idol worship, matters, i.e., transgressions, for which a Jewish court executes a Jew who commits one of them, are prohibited to a descendant of Noah. But with regard to transgressions for which a Jewish court does not execute a Jew who commits one of them, a descendant of Noah is not prohibited from doing them. To exclude what transgressions, i.e., to determine that they do not apply to gentiles, is this stated? Is it not to exclude the case of a gentile who fashioned an idol but did not bow to it? Since Jews are not executed for this transgression, gentiles should not be liable for this act either.

    אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: לָא, לְמַעוֹטֵי גִּיפּוּף וְנִישּׁוּק.

    Rav Pappa says: No, it is possible that it is stated to exclude embracing and kissing the idol; neither a Jew nor a gentile who embraces or kisses an idol is liable. No proof can be brought from here with regard to a gentile who fashions an idol but does not worship it.

    גִּיפּוּף וְנִישּׁוּק דְּמַאי? אִילֵּימָא כְּדַרְכָּהּ – בַּר קְטָלָא הוּא! אֶלָּא, לְמַעוֹטֵי שֶׁלֹּא כְּדַרְכָּהּ.

    The Gemara asks: Embracing and kissing an idol in what manner? If we say that he did so in its standard manner of worship, i.e., that embracing and kissing is the standard method of worshipping this idol, certainly he is liable to receive the death penalty. Rather, it is stated to exclude a case where he did not do so in its standard manner of worship.

    דִּינִין בְּנֵי נֹחַ אִיפְּקוּד? וְהָתַנְיָא: עֶשֶׂר מִצְוֹת נִצְטַוּוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּמָרָה, שֶׁבַע שֶׁקִּיבְּלוּ עֲלֵיהֶן בְּנֵי נֹחַ, וְהוֹסִיפוּ עֲלֵיהֶן דִּינִין וְשַׁבָּת וְכִיבּוּד אָב וָאֵם.

    § The Gemara asks with regard to the list of the Noahide mitzvot: Were the descendants of Noah commanded to establish courts of judgment? But isn’t it taught in a baraita : The Jewish people were commanded to observe ten mitzvot when they were in Marah: Seven that the descendants of Noah accepted upon themselves, and God added to them the following mitzvot: Judgment, and Shabbat, and honoring one’s father and mother.

    דִּינִין, דִּכְתִיב: ״שָׁם שָׂם לוֹ חֹק וּמִשְׁפָּט״. שַׁבָּת וְכִיבּוּד אָב וָאֵם, דִּכְתִיב: ״כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוְּךָ ה׳ אֱלֹהֶיךָ״. וְאָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה: ״כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוְּךָ״ – בְּמָרָה.

    The mitzva of judgment was given at Marah, as it is written with regard to Marah: “There He made for them a statute and an ordinance” (Exodus 15:25). Shabbat and honoring one’s father and mother were given at Marah, as it is written concerning them in the Ten Commandments: “Observe the day of Shabbat to keep it holy, as the Lord your God commanded you” (Deuteronomy 5:12), and similarly: “Honor your father and your mother, as the Lord your God commanded you” (Deuteronomy 5:16). The phrase “as the Lord your God commanded you” indicates that they had already been commanded to observe these mitzvot previously. And Rav Yehuda says: “As the Lord your God commanded you” in Marah. Apparently, the mitzva of establishing courts is not included in the seven Noahide mitzvot.

    אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר אֲבוּהּ: לֹא נִצְרְכָה אֶלָּא לָעֵדָה, וְעֵדִים, וְהַתְרָאָה.

    Rav Naḥman says that Rabba bar Avuh says: Establishing courts is a Noahide mitzva. The additional mitzva that was given in Marah was necessary only with regard to the details of the halakhot of the justice system, e.g., that a defendant in a capital case is punished only by a full panel of twenty-three judges of the Sanhedrin, and only if there are two witnesses who testify concerning him, and only if he was issued a forewarning before his transgression.

    אִי הָכִי, מַאי ״וְהוֹסִיפוּ עֲלֵיהֶן דִּינִין״?

    The Gemara asks: If so, and the mitzva given at Marah is a specification of the halakhot of the justice system, what is the meaning of the sentence: And God added to them: Judgment? The details of a preexisting mitzva would not be referred to as an added mitzva.

    אֶלָּא אָמַר רָבָא: לֹא נִצְרְכָה אֶלָּא לְדִינֵי קְנָסוֹת. אַכַּתִּי, ״וְהוֹסִיפוּ בְּדִינִין״ מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ!

    Rather, Rava says: The mitzva given at Marah was necessary only with regard to the halakhot of fines. Since these are not halakhot that pertain to the basic performance of justice, but rather concern an additional fine for the guilty party, they were not given to the descendants of Noah. The Gemara asks: According to this interpretation, the language of the baraita is still inaccurate, as it should have stated: And God added to them more halakhot of judgment.

    אֶלָּא אָמַר רַב אַחָא בַּר יַעֲקֹב: לֹא נִצְרְכָה אֶלָּא לְהוֹשִׁיב בֵּית דִּין בְּכׇל פֶּלֶךְ וָפֶלֶךְ, וּבְכׇל עִיר וָעִיר. וְהָא בְּנֵי נֹחַ לָא אִיפְּקוּד? וְהָתַנְיָא: כְּשֵׁם שֶׁנִּצְטַוּוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל לְהוֹשִׁיב בָּתֵּי דִינִין בְּכׇל פֶּלֶךְ וָפֶלֶךְ וּבְכׇל עִיר וָעִיר, כָּךְ נִצְטַוּוּ בְּנֵי נֹחַ לְהוֹשִׁיב בָּתֵּי דִינִין בְּכׇל פֶּלֶךְ וָפֶלֶךְ וּבְכׇל עִיר וָעִיר.

    Rather, Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov says: It was necessary only for the additional requirement to establish a court in each and every province and in each and every city. The Gemara asks: And were the descendants of Noah not commanded with regard to this matter? But isn’t it taught in a baraita : Just as the Jewish people were commanded to establish courts in each and every province and in each and every city, so too, the descendants of Noah were commanded to establish courts in each and every province and in each and every city?

    אֶלָּא אָמַר רָבָא: הַאי תַּנָּא תַּנָּא דְבֵי מְנַשֶּׁה הוּא, דְּמַפֵּיק דַּ״ךְ וְעָיֵיל סַ״ךְ.

    Rather, Rava says: This tanna , who holds that the mitzva of establishing courts of judgment is not included in the Noahide mitzvot, is the tanna of the school of Menashe, who removes from the list of the Noahide mitzvot two mitzvot whose mnemonic is dalet , kaf , which stands for judgment [ dinim ] and blessing the name of God [ birkat Hashem ], and inserts in their place two mitzvot whose mnemonic is samekh , kaf , standing for castration [ seirus ] and diverse kinds [ kilayim ].

    דְּתַנָּא דְבֵי מְנַשֶּׁה: שֶׁבַע מִצְוֹת נִצְטַוּוּ בְּנֵי נֹחַ – עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, וְגִילּוּי עֲרָיוֹת, וּשְׁפִיכוּת דָּמִים, גָּזֵל, וְאֵבֶר מִן הַחַי, סֵירוּס, וְכִלְאַיִם.

    As the school of Menashe taught: The descendants of Noah were commanded to observe seven mitzvot: The prohibitions of idol worship, and forbidden sexual relations, and bloodshed, and robbery, and eating a limb from a living animal, and castration, and diverse kinds.

    רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: אָדָם הָרִאשׁוֹן לֹא נִצְטַוָּוה אֶלָּא עַל עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה בִּלְבַד, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר ״וַיְצַו ה׳ אֱלֹהִים עַל הָאָדָם״. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶּן בְּתִירָה אוֹמֵר: אַף עַל בִּרְכַּת הַשֵּׁם. וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים: אַף עַל הַדִּינִים.

    Rabbi Yehuda says: Adam, the first man, was commanded only with regard to the prohibition of idol worship, as it is stated: “And the Lord God commanded the man” (Genesis 2:16). Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira says: He was also commanded concerning blessing the name of God. And some say that he was also commanded concerning establishing courts of judgment.

    כְּמַאן אָזְלָא הָא דְּאָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב: ״אֱלֹהִים אֲנִי״ – לֹא תְּקַלְּלוּנִי, ״אֱלֹהִים אֲנִי״ – לֹא תְּמִירוּנִי, ״אֱלֹהִים אֲנִי״ – יְהֵא מוֹרָאִי עֲלֵיכֶם? כְּמַאן? כְּיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים.

    The Gemara asks: In accordance with whose opinion is that which Rav Yehuda says that Rav says, in interpretation of the aforementioned verse: Since I am “God,” do not curse Me; since I am “God,” do not exchange Me with another god; since I am “God,” My fear shall be upon you? The Gemara answers: In accordance with whose opinion? It is in accordance with what some say, i.e., that the phrase “and the Lord God commanded the man” includes the prohibitions against cursing God’s name and idol worship, as well as the mitzva of establishing a system of law and justice, so that the fear of God will be upon the people.

    וְתַנָּא דְבֵי מְנַשֶּׁה: אִי דָּרֵישׁ ״וַיְצַו״ – אֲפִילּוּ הָנָךְ נָמֵי, אִי לָא דָּרֵישׁ ״וַיְצַו״ – הָנֵי מְנָא לֵיהּ?

    The Gemara challenges: If the tanna of the school of Menashe interprets the verse “and the Lord God commanded” homiletically, even these mitzvot, cursing the name of God and establishing courts, should be included. And if he does not interpret the verse “and the Lord God commanded” homiletically, from where does he derive these seven mitzvot in his list?

    לְעוֹלָם לָא דָּרֵישׁ ״וַיְצַו״. הָנֵי, כֹּל חֲדָא וַחֲדָא בְּאַפֵּי נַפְשַׁהּ כְּתִיבָא: עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה וְגִילּוּי עֲרָיוֹת -

    The Gemara answers: Actually, he does not interpret the verse “and the Lord God commanded” homiletically, but with regard to these mitzvot in his list, each and every one of them is written separately in the Torah. The prohibitions of idol worship and forbidden sexual relations are stated,