Jerusalem Talmud Sanhedrin Chapter 8

בֵּן סוֹרֵר וּמוֹרֶה מֵאֵימָתַי נַעֲשֶׂה בֵן סוֹרֵר וּמוֹרֶה מִשֶּׁיָּבִיא שְׁתֵּי שְׂעָרוֹת וְעַד שֶׁיַּקִּיף זָקָן הַתַּחְתּוֹן וְלֹא הָעֶלְיוֹן אֶלָּא שֶׁדִּבְּרוּ חֲכָמִים בְּלָשׁוֹן נְקִיָיה. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר כִּי יִהְיֶה לְאִישׁ בֵּן. בֵּן וְלֹא בַת. בֵּן וְלֹא אִישׁ. הַקָּטָן פָּטוּר שֶׁלֹּא בָא לִכְלָל הַמִּצְוֹת: בֵּן סוֹרֵר וּמוֹרֶה כול׳. רִבִּי זְעִירָא רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֶן חֲנִינָה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ. כָּתוּב וְכִי יָזִיד אִישׁ עַל רֵעֵהוּ לְהוֹרְגוֹ בְעָרְמָה. מֵאֵימָתַי הוּא נַעֲשֶׂה אִישׁ. מִשֶׁיָּזִיד. מֵאֵימָתַי הוּא מֵזִיד. מִשֶּׁתִּתְפַּשֵּׁט הַכַּף. מָשָׁל בָּשֵׁל הַזֶּרַע מִבִּפְנִים הִשְׁחִירָה הַקְּדֵירָה מִבַּחוּץ. אָמַר רִבִּי זְעִירָא. תַּנָּא רִבִּי שִׁילָא בַּר בִּינָא. כִּי יִהְיֶה לְאִישׁ בֵּן. לֹא שֶׁיְּהֵא הַבֵּן אָב. מִכֵּיוָן שֶׁהוּא רָאוּי לָבוֹא עַל אִשָּׁה וּלְעַבְּרָהּ הֲיֵי דִי לֵיהּ אָב וְלֹא בֵן. וְאָמְרָה הַתּוֹרָה. בֵּן וְלֹא אָב. וְאַתְיָא כַּיי דָמַר רִבִּי יָסָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי שַׁבְּתַי. כָּל יָמָיו שֶׁלְּבֵן סוֹרֵר וּמוֹרֶה אֵינָן אֶלָּא שִׁשָּׁה חֳדָשִׁים בִּלְבַד. אָמַר רִבִּי יָסָא. כָּל אִילֵּין מִילַּיָיא לָא מִסְתַּבְּרִין דְּלָא חִילּוּפִין. תַּנֵּי. תֵּדַע לָךְ שֶׁהוּא כֵן. מִי הָיָה בְדִין שֶׁיְּהֵא חַיָיב הַבֵּן אוֹ הַבַּת. הֲוֵי אוֹמֵר. הַבַּת. וּפָטְרָה הַתּוֹרָה אֶת הַבַּת וְחִיְיבָה אֶת הַבֵּן. מִי הָיָה בְדִין שֶׁיְּהֵא חַיָיב קָטוֹן אוֹ גָדוֹל. הֲוֵי אוֹמֵר. גָּדוֹל. פָּטְרָה הַתּוֹרָה אֶת הַגָּדוֹל וְחִיְיבָה אֶת הַקָּטָן. מִי הָיָה בְדִין שֶׁיְּהֵא חַיָיב הַגּוֹנֵב מִשֶׁלַּאֲחֵרִים אוֹ הַגּוֹנֵב מִשֶׁלְּאָבִיו וְאִמּוֹ. הֲוֵי אוֹמֵר. הַגּוֹנֵב מִשֶׁלַּאֲחֵרִים. פָּטְרָה הַתּוֹרָה הַגּוֹנֵב מִשֶׁלַּאֲחֵרִים וְחִיְיבָה הַגּוֹנֵב מִשֶׁלְּאָבִיו וְאִמּוֹ. לְלַמְּדָךְ שֶׁכּוּלָּן אֵינָן אֶלָּא בִגְזֵירַת מֶלֶךְ.

MISHNAH: The deviant and rebellious son. When can one become a deviant and rebellious son? From the moment he grows two [pubic] hairs to when he sports a beard, the lower, not the upper, because the Sages used clean language. For it is written: If a man have a [deviant and rebellious] son 21:18 . . A son but not a daughter, a son but not a father. The underage [son] is not liable since he does not have any obligation. HALAKHAH: “The deviant and rebellious son,” etc. Rebbi Zeˋira, Rebbi Abbahu, Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. It is written: If a man would concoct against his neighbor to kill him slyly . 21:14 . The argument is an almost untranslatable pun, identifying the two meanings of the root זוד “to plot, to be mischievous” and “to cook” ( Babli 69a ). (Gesenius-Buhl also notes the two meanings for the root; modern Jewish lexicographers following Ben Jehudah prefer to derive the hapax “to cook” from a root נזד.) . When does he become a man? When he concocts. When is he done cooking? When his palm as anatomic detail denotes the mons veneris of a woman ( Yebamot 1:2, Note 143 ); it is used here for the corresponding pubic area of the man. expands. A simile: If the seed is fully cooked inside, the pot becomes black on the outside. Rebbi Zeˋira said that Rebbi Shila bar Bina stated: If a man have a son , not that the son be a father. From the moment that he may come to a woman and make her pregnant, he is a potential father, not a son 3:10 Note 143 ), he cannot be held responsible for his actions before he reaches age 13. Therefore, he can be a responsible father only at age 13. The Babli (68b , 69b ) and the Yerushalmi ( Yebamot 10:14, Notes 209–211 ; copied Qiddušin 1:2 59c l. 26, p. 73) recognize the fact that an underage male may become a father. The son born to an underage father can never become deviant and rebellious since he is not the son of a man as required by the verse. . But the Torah said, a son, not a father. It parallels what Rebbi Yasa said in the name of Rebbi Sabbatai: The entire period of a “deviant and rebellious son” is only six months. Rebbi Yasa said, all these rules would be reasonable if they were the opposite. It was stated: You should know that this is the case. Who according to reason should be guilty, son or daughter? One would say, a daughter. But the Torah freed the daughter and declared the son guilty. Who according to reason should be guilty, the younger or the older? One would say, the older. But the Torah freed the older and declared the younger guilty. Who according to reason should be guilty, one who steals from others or one who steals from father or mother? One would say, one who steals from others. But the Torah freed the one who steals from others and declared the one who steals from father or mother guilty. To teach that all of these [rules] are only the King’s decisions.

מֵאֵימָתַי הוּא חַיָיב מִשֶּׁיֹּאכַל טרטימר בָּשָׂר וְיִשְׁתֶּה חֲצִי לוֹג יַיִן בָּאִיטַלְקִי. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר מְנָה בָשָׂר וְלוֹג יָיִן. אָכַל בַּחֲבוּרַת מִצְוָה אָכַל בְּעִבּוּר הַחֹדֶשׁ אָכַל מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי בִּירוּשָׁלִַם. אָכַל נְבֵלוֹת וּטְרֵפוֹת וּשְׁקָצִים וּרְמָשִׂים. אָכַל דָּבָר שֶׁהוּא מִצְוָה וְדָבָר שֶׁהוּא עֲבֵרָה אָכַל כָּל מַאֲכָל וְלֹא אָכַל בָּשָׂר שָׁתָה כָל מַשְׁקֶה וְלֹא שָׁתָה יַיִן אֵינוֹ נַעֲשֶׂה בֵן סוֹרֵר וּמוֹרֶה עַד שֶׁיֹּאכַל בָּשָׂר וְיִשְׁתֶּה יַיִן שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר זוֹלֵל וְסֹבֵא. וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין רְאָיָה לַדָּבָר זֵכֶר לַדָּבָר שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר אַל תְּהִי בְסוֹבְאֵי יָין בְּזוֹלְלֵי בָשָׂר לָמוֹ: מֵאֵימָתַי הוּא חַיָיב כול׳. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. טרטימר חֲצִי לִיטְרָא הוּא. אֵינוֹ חַיָיב עַד שֶׁיֹּאכְלֶנּוּ מְהוּבְהָב. אֲכָלוֹ חַי כֶּלֶב הוּא. אֲכָלוֹ מְבוּשָּׁל בַּר נַשׁ הוּא. אֲכָלוֹ הסוקים מָהוּ. גִּידִּים הָרַכִּים מָה הֵן. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר. נִימְנִין עֲלֵיהֶן. רִבִּי שִׁמָעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ אָמַר. אֵין נִמְנִין עֲלֵיהֶן. רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אָחָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי זְעִירָא. אִיתְפַּלְּגוֹן רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן וְרִבִּי שִׁמָעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ. דְּתַנִּינָן תַּמָּן. אֵילּוּ שֶׁעוֹרוֹתֵיהֶן כִּבְשָׂרָן. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. עוֹר זֶה לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא לְאִיסּוּר וּלְטומְאָה. הָא לִלְקוֹת לֹא. רִבִּי שִׁמָעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ אָמַר. מִשְׁנָה תְמִימָה שָׁנָה רִבִּי. בֵּין לְאִיסּוּר בֵּין לְטוּמְאָה. מִחְלְפָה שִׁיטָּתֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי שִׁמָעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ. תַּמָּן הוּא עֲבַד לָהּ בָּשָׂר. וָכָא לָא עֲבַד לָהּ בָּשָׂר. אָמַר רִבִּי יוּדָה בַּר פָּזִי. שַׁנְיָיא הִיא תַמָּן שֶׁהוּא עוֹר וְסוֹפוֹ לְהַקְשׁוֹת. כָּל שֶׁכֵּן מִחְלְפָה שִׁיטָּתֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי שִׁמָעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ. וּמַה תַמָּן שֶׁסוֹפוֹ לְהַקְשׁוֹת הוּא עֲבַד לָהּ בָּשָׂר. כָּאן שֶׁאֵין סוֹפוֹ לְהַקְשׁוֹת לֹא כָל שֶׁכֵּן. אָמַר רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ. טַעֲמָא דְרִבִּי יוּדָה בֶּן פָּזִי וְאָכְלוּ אֶת הַבָּשָׂר. לֹא גִּידִּים. אָכַל בַּחֲבוּרַת מִצְוָה. אָכַל בְּעִיבּוּר הַחוֹדֶשׁ. אָכַל מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁינִי בִּירוּשָׁלֵם. וְיִסְּרוּ אוֹתוֹ וְאֵינֶנּוּ שׁוֹמֵעַ בְּקוֹלָם. יָצָא זֶהּ שֶׁהוּא שׁוֹמֵעַ בְּקוֹל אָבִיו שֶׁבַּשָּׁמַיִם. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. אִם הִזְכִּירוּךָ לְבוּלֵי יִהְיֶה יַרְדֵּן בַּעַל גְּבוּלְךָ. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. קוּבְלִין לָרָשׁוּת לְהִיפָּטֵר מִבּוּלֵי. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. לוֹוִין בְּרִיבִּית לַחֲבוּרַת מִצְוָה וּלְקִידּוּשׁ הַחוֹדֶשׁ. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן הֲוָה עֲלִיל לִכְנִישְׁתָּא בְצַפְרָא וּמְלַקֵּט פֵּירוּרִין וַאֲכִיל וַאֲמַר. יְהֵא חֶלְקִי עִם מָאן דְּקַדֵּשׁ יַרְחָא הָכָא רוּמְשִׁית. אָכַל נְבֵילוֹת וּטְרֵיפוֹת שְׁקָצִים וּרְמָשִׂים. וְיִסְּרוּ אוֹתוֹ וְלֹא יִשְׁמַע בְּקוֹלָם. יָצָא זֶה אֲפִילוּ בְּקוֹל אָבִיו שֶׁבַּשָּׁמַיִם אֵינוֹ שׁוֹמֵעַ.

MISHNAH: When is he guilty? From the moment he eats a fourfold in the Babli ( Pesahim 86b , Besah 25b ) states that a civilized person drinks a cup of wine (a quarter log , about 130 cm) in two sips. One becomes deviant in drinking half a log in one gulp; this is the fourfold amount of a civilized person. The “fourfold amount” of meat is defined in the Halakhah (and the Babli) as half a Roman pound. Therefore, a civilized person will eat meat in portions no larger than 1½ Roman oz. per bite. The amount mentioned in the Mishnah refers to a single bite or sip, not the total amounts consumed during a meal (Maimonides Mamrim 7:2). The form טרטימר instead of טטרמור is not unusual since Greek words copied into Aramaic or Hebrew often exhibit metathesis if one of the consonants λμνρ is involved [H. and E. Guggenheimer, למילון התלמודי יב Lešonenu 39(1975) 59–60.] portion of meat and drinks half a log of wine. Rebbi Yose says, a mina of meat of 100 drachmas, not a Semitic maneh of 60 šeqels (between 120 and 240 drachmas), cf. Note 20 . and a log of wine. If he ate in a company of obligation, or at the lengthening of a month, or ate Second Tithe in Jerusalem, or ate torn or carcass meat, abominations and crawling things, i. e., if he ate anything which either is an obligation or anything forbidden, or ate any food but not meat, or drank any drink but not wine, he does not turn into a deviant and rebellious son unless he ate meat and drank wine, since it is said: gorging and drinking to excess 21:18 . . Even if it is not proof, there is a hint in what is said: Do not be among those who drink wine excessively, nor with those who are gorging themselves on meat . 23:20 . . HALAKHAH: “When is he guilty,” etc. Rebbi Yose said in the Eastern Roman Empire was the name of the silver denar, one has to assume that mina as a weight simply was a name for the Roman pound. [D. Sperber ( Roman Palestine 200–400 , Money and Prices , Ramat Gan 1974) consistently writes mina for the weight and maneh for the coin. But since a talmudic מנה always denotes 100 denars, there is no reason not to read the word as Μνᾶ, מְנָה.] , the fourfold portion is half a Roman pound. He is guilty only it he ate it rare. If he ate it raw, he is a dog. If he ate it cooked, he is a human. If he ate cartilage and probably corrupt. It is translated as if it were written חסוכים. , what is the rule? What is the rule about soft sinews? 7:11 (35a l. 62); the final result there and here is that the discussion is irrelevant for the rules regarding the deviant and rebellious son, which implies that for the fourfold portion nothing can be included that is not regularly counted as food. The paschal lamb may be eaten only by persons who had subscribed to it, i. e., who were part of the group for whom the lamb was slaughtered during the afternoon of the 14 of Nisan. The lamb should be eaten in small quantities at the end of the meal; the minimum quantity per person is the volume of an average olive (כְּזַיִת). The question now arises whether barely edible parts, such as cartilage and soft sinews, can be used to fulfill the duty of eating from the paschal lamb and the number of subscribers increased accordingly. Rebbi Joḥanan said, one subscribes to them; Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, one does not subscribe to them. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Zeˋira: Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish disagreed about what is stated there 9:2 . Mishnah 9:1 states that in general the hide of an animal is subject to the rules of impurity of food, but not to those of impurity of carcasses. Then Mishnah 2 lists some animals whose hides follow the rules of flesh in all respects (general consensus exists only for humans and domesticated pigs.) R. Johanan holds that for eating pigskin one never can be prosecuted, while R. Simeon ben Laqish holds that eating pigskin, not yet transformed into leather, is as punishable as eating pork. : “The following have their hides treated like their flesh.” Rebbi Joḥanan said, this was only said as prohibition and regarding impurity, but not for flogging. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, Rebbi stated a complete Mishnah, not only for prohibition and regarding impurity it is stated explicitly that the differences among the rabbis are about whipping offenders. . The reasoning of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish seems inverted. There, he treats it as flesh, but here, he does not treat it as meat. . Rebbi Judah bar Pazi said, there is a difference, since there one refers to skin which in the end will become hard. This emphasizes that the reasoning of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish seems inverted! Since there, where in the end it will harden, he treats it as flesh, here where in the end it will not harden, not so much more? Rebbi Abbahu” R. Abun”. said, the reason of Rebbi Judah bar Pazi is: they shall eat the meat in that night . 12:8 , a verse about the paschal lamb, irrelevant for the rules about the deviant and rebellious son. , not sinews. “If he ate in a company of obligation, or at the lengthening of a month, or ate Second Tithe in Jerusalem.” They would discipline him , but he does not listen to their voice. 21:18 , for: but he does not listen to the voice of his father or his mother . . This excludes one who listens to the voice of his Father in Heaven 1:2, Note 630 . . 2:3 (81b l. 33). There it was stated that one is permitted to earn money on the intermediate days of a holiday in order to have more money to spend on festive meals. The connection to this Chapter is that the deviant and rebellious son is absolved if he partakes of festive meals. Rebbi Joḥanan said, if you were nominated for the city council, may the Jordan be the master of your border, one is permitted to leave the Land of Israel. . Rebbi Joḥanan said, one complains to the government to be freed from the city council. Rebbi Joḥanan said, one borrows against interest for a company of obligation and the sanctification of the month. Rebbi Joḥanan used to go to the assembly hall in the morning, collect the crumbs, and eat them, saying: May my part be with those who in the evening were sanctifying the month. “Or ate torn or carcass meat, abominations and crawling things.” They would discipline him , but he would not listen to their voice. 21:18 , for: but he does not listen to the voice of his father or his mother . . This excludes one who even to the voice of his Father in Heaven 1:2, Note 630 . does not listen.

גָּנַב מִשֶּׁל אָבִיו וְאָכַל בִּרְשׁוּת אָבִיו מִשֶּׁל אֲחֵרִים וְאָכַל בִּרְשׁוּת אֲחֵרִים מִשֶּׁל אֲחֵרִים וְאָכַל בִּרְשׁוּת אָבִיו אֵינוֹ נַעֲשָׂה בֵן סוֹרֵר וּמוֹרֶה עַד שֶׁיִּגְנוֹב מִשֶּׁל אָבִיו וְיֹאכַל בִּרְשׁוּת אֲחֵרִים. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵי רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר עַד שֶׁיִּגְנוֹב מִשֶּׁל אָבִיו וּמִשֶּׁל אִמּוֹ: גָּנַב מִשֶּׁלְּאָבִיו כול׳. אַזְהָרָה לַגְּנֵיבָה הָרִאשׁוֹנָה מְנַיִין. לֹא תִּגְנוֹבוּ. אַזְהָרָה לַגְּנֵיבָה שְׁנִיָיה מְנַיִין. לֹא תִּגְנוֹבוּ. לֹא תִּגְנוֹבוּ עַל מְנָת לְמַקֵּט. לֹא תִּגְנוֹבוּ עַל מְנָת לְשַׁלֵּם תַּשְׁלוּמֵי כֶפֶל. עַל מְנָת לְשַׁלֵּם תַּשְׁלוּמֵי אַרְבָּעָה וַחֲמִשָּׁה. בֶּן בַּגְבָּג אוֹמֵר. לֹא תִגְנוֹב אֶת שֶׁלָּךְ מֵאַחַר הַגַּנָּב. שֶׁלֹּא תֵרָאֶה גוֹנֵב. רִבִּי בָּא רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בְּשֵׁם רַב הוֹשַׁעְיָה. אֵינוֹ חַיָיב עַד שֶׁיּגְנוֹב מָעוֹת. רִבִּי זְעִירָה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי הוֹשַׁעְיָה. אֵינוֹ חַיָיב עַד שֶׁיְּזַלְזֵל מָעוֹת. מָהוּ שֶׁיְּזַלְזֵל מָעוֹת. מָה אֲנָן קַיָימִין. אִם בָּהוּ דְאָמַר. הֵא לָךְ חֲמִשָּׁה וְהַב לִי תְלָתָא. שַׁטִּי הוּא. הֵא לָךְ תְּלָתָא וְהַב לִי חֲמִשָּׁה. בַּר נַשׁ הוּא. אֶלָּא כִי נָן קַיָימִין בָּהוּא דָמַר. הֵא לָךְ חֲמִשָּׁה וְהַב לִי חֲמִשָּׁה. הֵי דֵינוֹ גַנָּב וְהֵי דֵינוֹ גַזְלָן. אָמַר רִבִּי הִילָא. גָּנַב בִּפְנֵי עֵדִים גַּנָּב. בִּפְנֵי הַבְּעָלִים גַּזְלָן. רִבִּי זְעוּרָה בָעֵי. מֵעַתָּה אֲפִילוּ נִתְכַּוֵון לִגְזֵילָה וּלְבַעֲלֶיהָ אֵין זֶה גוֹזְלָן. וְהֵידֵינוֹ גוֹזְלָן עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי זְעוּרָה. רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר סוֹסַרְטָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ. עַד שֶׁיִּגְזְלֶנּוּ בִפְנֵי עֲשָׂרָה בְנֵי אָדָם. בִּנְיָין אָב שֶׁבְּכוּלָּן וַיִּגְזוֹל אֶת הַחֲנִית מִיַּד הַמִּצְרִי וַיַּהַרְגֵהוּ בַּחֲנִיתוֹ.

MISHNAH: If he stole from his father and ate at his father’s property, or from others and ate at others’ property, or from others and ate at his father’s property, he is not treated as deviant and rebellious son unless he stole from his father and ate at others’ property. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah says, unless he stole both from his father and his mother. HALAKHAH: “If he stole from his father,” etc. From where a first warning about stealing: you shall not steal לֹא תִגְנוב, Ex . 20:16 . The Ten Commandments only refer to the worst of crimes; stealing referred to there is kidnapping of humans, a capital crime ( Babli 86a , Bava meṣia` 61b). . From where a second warning about stealing: you shall not steal . 19:11 . The remainder of the paragraph is a baraita also in Sifra Qedošim Parašah 2(2 ), Tosephta Bava qamma 10 ;37–38, Babli Bava qamma 27b ( Tanhuma Noah 4 ). Stealing is forbidden even if one intends to return the stolen goods after teaching the owner a lesson, or to have a pretext to give a poor person money in the shape of a fine. . You shall not steal , in order to aggravate; you shall not steal , in order to pay double restitution, in order to pay quadruple or quintuple restitution. Ben Bagbag says, do not steal your own property from the thief, lest you be seen stealing. Rebbi Abba, Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rav Hoshaia: he is guilty only if he steals money. Rebbi Zeˋira in the name of Rebbi Hoshaia: he is guilty only if he shows contempt for money. What means showing contempt for money? Where do we hold? If about him who says, here you have five and give me for three, he is an idiot. Here you have three and give me for five, he is a regular person. But we deal with one who says, here you have five and give me for five. What is a thief and what is a robber? Rebbi Hila said, if he stole in the presence of witnesses, he is a thief, in the presence of the owners he is a robber. Rebbi Ze`ura asked: but if he intended to rob in front of its owners, he is not a robber. What is a robber according to Rebbi Ze`ura? Rebbi Samuel ben Sosarta in the name of Rebbi Abbahu: only if he rob in the presence of ten people. The prototype for all these: He robbed the spear from the hand of the Egyptian and killed him with his own spear . 23:21 . R. Zeˋira insists that the characteristic of the robber is not that he takes by force, even in the presence of the owners, but that he does it in public. As always, “in public” is defined as in the presence of ten adult males. Babli Bava qamma 79b . .

הָיָה אָבִיו רוֹצֶה וְאִמּוֹ אֵינָהּ רוֹצָה אָבִיו אֵינוֹ רוֹצֶה וְאִמּוֹ רוֹצָה אֵינוֹ נַעֲשֶׂה בֵן סוֹרֵר וּמוֹרֶה עַד שֶׁיְּהוּ שְׁנֵיהֶם רוֹצִים. רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר אִם לֹא הָיְתָה אִמּוֹ רְאוּיָה לְאָבִיו אֵינוֹ נַעֲשֶׂה בֵן סוֹרֵר וּמוֹרֶה. הָיָה אָבִיו רוֹצֶה כול׳. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. וַאֲפִילוּ אֵין אִמּוֹ רְאוּיָה לְאָבִיו. וְכָל מַה שֶׁיֵּשׁ לְאִמּוֹ לֹא מִשֶּׁלְּאָבִיו הֵם. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי בּוּן. תִּיפְתָּר בָּהוּ דַּהֲוָת נָסְבָה דִיּוּרִין וְעָבְדָת שֵׁירוּ וְגָנַב מִינְּהוֹן.

MISHNAH: If his father was willing but not his mother, or his father unwilling but his mother willing, he cannot be treated as deviant and rebellious son unless both be willing. 21:20 where the parents have to complain that the son does not listen to their voice. The singular used, voice, implies common voice. (The Babli 71a infers that the parents actually have to speak with one voice; their voices have to sound the same. This is not mentioned in Yerushalmi or Sifry .) . Rebbi Jehudah says if his mother was inappropriate for his father, he cannot be treated as deviant and rebellious son. HALAKHAH: “If his father was willing,” etc. Rebbi Joḥanan said, even if his mother was not suitable for his father. But is not all of his mother’s property also his father’s? Rebbi Yose ben Abun said, explain it about one who took in lodgers, made repasts, and he stole from there. many exceptions are noted to the rule that the husband has the usufruct of the wife’s property or the right to her earnings.

הָיָה אֶחָד מֵהֶם גִּידֵּם אוֹ חִיגֵּר אוֹ אִילֵּם אוֹ סוּמֶא אוֹ חֵרֵשׁ אֵינוֹ נַעֲשֶׂה בֵן סוֹרֵר וּמוֹרֶה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר וְתָפְשׂוּ בוֹ אָבִיו וְאִמּוֹ וְלֹא גִידְּמִין. וְהוֹצִיאוּ אֹתוֹ וְלֹא חִיגְּרִים וְאָמְרוּ וְלֹא אִלְּמִין בְּנֵנוּ זֶה וְלֹא סוּמִים אֵינֶנּוּ שֹׁמֵעַ בְּקֹלֵנוּ וְלֹא חֵרְשִׁים. מַתְרִין בּוֹ בִּפְנֵי שְׁלשָׁה וּמַלְקִין אוֹתוֹ. חָזַר וְקִילְקֵל נִדּוֹן בְּעֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁלשָׁה. וְאֵינוֹ נִסְקַל עַד שֶׁיְּהוּ שָׁם שְׁלשָׁה הָרִאשׁוֹנִים שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר בְּנֵנוּ זֶה זֶה הוּא שֶׁלָּקָה בִּפְנֵיכֶם. הָיָה אֶחָד מֵהֶם גִּידֵּם כול׳. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁאַתְּ דּוֹרֵשׁ בְּאָבִיו וּבְאִמּוֹ כָּךְ אַתְּ דּוֹרֵשׁ בְּזִקְנֵי בֵית דִּין. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר ויָצְאוּ פְּרָט לְחִיגְרִים. וְאָמְרוּ פְּרָט לְאִילְּמִים. יָדֵינוּ לֹא שָׁפְכוּ פְּרָט לְגִידְמִים. וְעֵינֵינוּ לֹא רָאוּ פְּרָט לְסוּמִין. מַגִּיד הַכָּתוּב כְּשֵׁם שֶׁזִּקְנֵי בֵית דִּין שְׁלֵימִין בְּצֶדֶק כָּךְ הֵם צְרִיכִין לִהְיוֹת שְׁלֵימִין בְּאֵיבָרֵיהֶן. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנַן. מֵת אֶחָד מִן הָרִאשׁוֹנִים אֵינוֹ נִסְקַל. וְלֹא מַתְנִיתָא הִיא. אֵינוֹ נִסְקַל עַד שֶׁיְּהוּ שָׁם שְׁלשָׁה הָרִאשׁוֹנִים. אָמַר רִבִּי הוֹשַׁעְיָה. שֶׁלֹּא תֹאמַר. יֵעָשֶׂה דִין שֵׁינִי רִאשׁוֹן. לְפוּם כֵּן צָרַךְ מַתְנִיתָה.

MISHNAH: If one of them was one-armed, or lame, or mute, or deaf, he cannot be tried as deviant and rebellious son, as it is said:. 21:19 . His father and mother shall grab him , not one-armed ones, bring him out , not lame ones, and say , not mute ones, this son of ours , and not blind ones, he does not listen to our voice , not deaf ones. One warns him before three [judges] and whips him. If he becomes a repeat offender, he is tried by 23 but cannot be stoned unless the original three were present, since it is said this son of ours , this is the one who was whipped before you. HALAKHAH: “If one of them was one-armed.” etc. Just as one explains for his father and mother, so one explains for the Elders of the Court, as it is said . 21:2 . : They shall go out , to exclude lame ones; and say . 21:7 . , to exclude mute ones; our hands did not spill , to exclude one-armed ones; and our eyes did not see , to exclude blind ones. The verse tells you that just as the Elders of the Court must be unblemished morally, so they must be unblemished physically. Rebbi Joḥanan said, if one of the first [judges] died, he cannot be stoned. Is that not the Mishnah: “he cannot be stoned unless the original three were present”? Rebbi Hoshaia said, you should not say that the second trial should become the first; therefore, one had to state this.

בָּרַח עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִגְמַר דִּינוֹ וְאַחַר כָּךְ הִקִּיף זָקָן הַתַּחְתּוֹן פָּטוּר. וְאִם מִשֶּׁנִּגְמַר דִּינוֹ בָרַח וְאַחַר כָּךְ הִקִּיף זָקָן הַתַּחְתּוֹן חַיָיב: בָּרַח עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִגְמַר דִּינוֹ כול׳. אָמַר רִבִּי יֹאשִׁיָּה. סָח לִי זְעִירָה מִשֵּׁם אַנְשֵׁי יְרוּשָׁלִַם. שְׁלֹשָׁה הֵן שֶׁאִם בִּיקְשׁוּ לִמְחוֹל מוֹחֲלִין. וְאֵילּוּ הֵן. סוֹטָה וּבֵן סוּרֵר וּמוֹרֶה וְזָקֵן מַמְרֵא עַל פִּי בֵית דִּין. סוֹטָה. וְלֹא מַתְנִיתָא הִיא. שֶׁבַּעֲלָהּ אֵינוֹ רוֹצֶה לְהַשְׁקוֹתָהּ. סָבְרִין מֵימַר. עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִכְתְּבָה הַמְּגִילָּה. אֲתַא מֵימַר. וַאֲפִילוּ מִשֶּׁנִּכְתְּבָה הַמְּגִילָּה. וּבְשֶׁלֹּא נִמְחְקָה הַמְּגִילָּה. אֲבָל אִם נִמְחְקָה הַמְּגִילָּה לֹא בְדָא. בֵּן סוּרֵר וּמוֹרֶה. וְלֹא מַתְנִיתָא הִיא. הָיָה אָבִיו רוֹצֶה וְאִמּוֹ אֵינָהּ רוֹצָה. אִמּוֹ רוֹצָה וְאָבִיו אֵינוֹ רוֹצֶה. סָבְרִין מֵימַר. עַד שֶׁלֹּא עָמַד בְּדִין. אֲתַא מֵימַר לָךְ. וַאֲפִילוּ עָמַד בְּדִין. וּבְשֶׁלֹּא נִגְמַר דִּינוֹ. אֲבָל אִם נִגְמַר דִּינוֹ לֹא בְדָא. זָקֵן מַמְרֵא. הָדָא דְתֵימַר שֶׁלֹּא לְהוֹרְגוֹ. אֲבָל לְהַחֲזִירוֹ לֹא הָיוּ מַחֲזִירִין אוֹתוֹ לִמְקוֹמוֹ. וּכְשֶׁבָּאתִי אֶצֶל רִבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶּן בָּתֵירָה לִנְצִיבִין עַל שְׁנַיִם הוֹדָה לִי וְעַל אֶחָד לֹא הוֹדָה לִי. עַל זָקֵן מַמְרֵא לֹא הוֹדָה לִי כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יִרְבּוּ מַחֲלוֹקוֹת בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל. מַה טַעֲמוֹן דְּבֵית שַׁמַּי. הָבֵא לִי בַעֲלִי וַאֲנִי שׁוֹתָה. מַה טַעֲמוֹן דְּבֵית הִלֵּל. הוֹאִיל וְאֵין כָּאן בַּעַל לְהַשְׁקוֹתָהּ הֶחֱזִירָתָהּ הַתּוֹרָה לִסְפֵיקָה וּסְפֵיקָה לִסְפֵיקָה. וּסְפֵיקָה לְחוּדֵיהּ. תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן. הַפּוֹגֶמֶת כְּתוּבָּתָהּ לֹא תִיפָּרַע אֶלָּא בִשְׁבוּעָה. תַּנֵּי הַפּוֹגֶמֶת לֹא הַפּוֹחֶתֶת. כֵּיצַד. הָיְתָה כְתוּבָּתָהּ מָאתַיִם וְהִיא אוֹמֶרֶת מְנָה נִפְרַעַת שֶׂלֹּא בִשְׁבוּעָה. מַה בֵין הַפּוֹגֶמֶת וּמַה בֵין הַפּוֹחֶתֶת. אָמַר רִבִּי חֲנִינָה. [פּוֹגֶמֶת] בָּא מַשָּׂא וּמַתָּן בֵּנֹתַיִים. פּוֹחֶתֶת לֹא בָא מַשָּׂא וּמַתָּן בֵּנֹתַיִים. רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה בָעֵי. כְּמַה דַּתֲּ מַר תַּמָּן. וְעֵד אֶחָד מְעִידָהּ שֶׁהִיא פְרוּעָה לֹא תִיפָּרַע אֶלָּא בִשְׁבוּעָה. וְדִכְוָתָהּ וְעֵד אֶחָד מְעִידָהּ שֶׁהִיא פְחוּתָה לֹא תִיפְחַת אֶלָּא בִשְׁבוּעָה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁעֵד אֶחָד מְעִידָהּ שֶׁהִיא פְרוּעָה אֵינוֹ מַכְחִישׁ שְׁנַיִם. וּבְשָׁעָה שֶׁמֵּעִיד שֶׁפְּחוּתָה מַכְחִישׁ אֶת שְׁנַיִם. תַּנֵּי. וְהַנִּפְרַעַת שֶׁלֹּא בְפָנָיו לֹא תִיפָּרַע אֶלָּא בִשְׁבוּעָה. וְנִפְרָעִים מֵאָדָם שֶׁלֹּא בְפָנָיו. אָמַר רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה. תִּיפְתָּר בִּשְׁטָר שֶׁהָרִיבִּית אוֹכֶלֶת בּוֹ. וּבֵית דִּין גּוֹבִין רִבִּית. תִּיפְתָּר שֶׁעָרַב לוֹ מִגּוֹי. וְהָתַנֵּי. יוֹרֵשׁ שֶׁפָּגַם אָבִיו שְׁטָר חוֹב הַבֵּן גּוֹבֶה בְלֹא שְׁבוּעָה. בָּזֶה יָפֶה כֹחַ הַבֵּן מִכֹּחַ הָאָב. שֶׁהָאָב אֵינוֹ גוֹבֶה אֶלָּא בִשְׁבוּעָה. אָמַר רִבִּי לָעְזָר. וְנִשְׁבַּע שְׁבוּעַת יוֹרֵשׁ. שֶׁלֹּא פִיקַּדְנוּ אַבָּא וְשֶׁלֹּא אָמַר לָנוּ אַבָּא וְשֶׁלֹּא מָצִינוּ שְׁטָר בֵּין שִׁטְרוֹתָיו שֶׁלְּאַבָּא שֶׁשְּׁטָר זֶה פָרוּעַ. הָא אִם נִמָצָא פָרוּעַ. רַב הוֹשַׁעְיָה בָעֵי. מַתְנִיתָא דְבֵית שַׁמַּי. דְּבֵית שַׁמַּי אוֹמְרִים. נוֹטֶלֶת כְּתוּבָּתָהּ וְלֹא שׁוֹתָה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. טַעֲמוֹן דְּבֵית שַׁמַּי הָבֵא לִי בַעֲלִי וַאֲנִי שׁוֹתָה. בְּרַם הָכָא בְּדִין הָיָה אֲפִילוּ אָבִיו לֹא יִשְׁבַּע. תַּקָּנָה תִיקְנוּ בוֹ שֶׁיִּשְׁבַּע. בּוֹ תִיקְנוּ וּבִבְנוֹ לֹא תִיקְנוּ. מִכֵּיוָן שֶׁמֵּת הֶעֱמַדְתָּ אֶת בְּנוֹ עַל דִּין תּוֹרָה. נִתְחַיֵיב אָבִיו שְׁבוּעָה בְּבֵית דִּין וּמֵת אֵין בְּנוֹ גוֹבֶה. דִּלֹא כֵן מָה נָן אָמְרִין. יֵשׁ אָדָם מוֹרִישׁ שְׁבוּעָתוֹ לִבְנוֹ. אָמַר רִבִּי בָּא. הָכֵין אִיתְאֲמָרַת. פָּגַם אָבִיו שְׁטָרוֹ בְּבֵית דִּין וּמֵת אֵינוֹ גוֹבֶה. רַב חִסְדָּא בָעֵי. בְּגִין דַּהֲלִיךְ תַּרְתֵּין פְּסִיעָן הוּא מַפְסִיד. אִילּוּ פְגָמוֹ חוּץ לְבֵית דִּין אַתְּ מַר. גּוֹבֶה. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁפְּגָמוֹ בְבֵית דִּין אַתֲּ מַר. אֵינוֹ גוֹבֶה.

MISHNAH: If he escaped before sentence was passed and then grew the lower beard, he is not liable; but if he escaped after sentence was passed and then grew the lower beard, he is liable. HALAKHAH: “If he escaped before sentence was passed,” etc. 4:3, Notes 39–41 . This is one of the few cases where the Leiden ms. does not copy the text but simply refers to it by “etc.” The parallel quotes in the Babli are Sotah 25a , Sanhedrin 88a . Rebbi Joshia said, Zeˋira told me in the name of the people of Jerusalem: In three cases, if they want to forgive, they may forgive. These are: The suspect wife, the deviant son, and the Elder rebelling against the [Supreme] Court. The suspect wife, is that not a Mishnah, “one whose husband refuses to let her drink”? They wanted to say, before the scroll was written. He comes to tell, even after the scroll was written. But it does not apply to the case where the scroll had been erased. The deviant son, is that not a Mishnah, “if his father was willing but not his mother, or his mother willing but his father unwilling”? They wanted to say, before he was tried. He comes to tell, even after he was tried. But it does not apply to the case where judgment had been passed. The rebellious Elder. 17:8–13 . Even if he is not executed, he has to be stripped of his judicial functions. ; that means not to kill him. But they cannot let him return to his place. But when I came to Rebbi Jehudah ben Bathyra at Nisibis, he agreed with me in two cases and disagreed in one. He disagreed about the rebellious Elder, lest quarrels increase in Israel. What is the reason of the House of Shammai? “Bring me my husband and I shall drink.” What is the reason of the House of Hillel? Since there is no husband to let her drink, the Torah returns her to a state of doubt, which induces another doubt, which remains a doubt 4:3 . It was omitted there together with the preceding four paragraphs. If a husband suspects his wife of adultery and warns her in the presence of two adult witnesses not to be with her suspected paramour, then if there is circumstantial evidence of adultery but no proof which would hold up in court, the wife is forbidden to her husband until she undergoes the ordeal by drinking the magic water in the Temple court ( Num . 11:5–31 ). If the ordeal confirms her adultery, she is divorced as adulteress without any money.The ordeal must take place in the presence of the husband. If the husband dies before the ordeal can take place, the woman cannot drink. The House of Shammai rules that she is a widow, entitled to all benefits due to a widow, since the death of her husband barred her from clearing her name without her fault. The House of Hillel hold that as suspected adulteress she cannot go to court to collect money from the heirs to the estate since only valid claims can be enforced in court; it is not the heirs’ doing that she cannot prove her case ( Soṭah 4:1 Notes 13–16 ). . 9:7, Notes 167–185 . It has no connection with the theme in Sanhedrin , only a tenuous one with the previously quoted text from Sotah . The text here is secondary as shown by a few omissions. There, we stated: “If she had compromised her ketubah , she shall not be able to collect without an oath.” It was stated “compromised”, not that she reduced [her ketubah ]. How? If her ketubah was 200 but she claims a mina, she is paid without an oath. What is the difference between one who did compromise and one who claims less? Rebbi Ḥanina said, if she compromises there was a transaction between them; if she claims less there was no transaction between them. Rebbi Jeremiah asked: Since we stated there: “If one witness testified that [the ketubah ] was paid, she shall not be able to collect without an oath”; should it be similar that if one witness testifies that [the ketubah ] was reduced, she shall not be able to collect the reduced amount without an oath? Rebbi Yose said, at the moment when one witness testified that it was paid, he does not contradict two [witnesses]; but when he testifies that it was reduced he would contradict two [witnesses.] 9:9, Notes 200–204 . It was stated: “If she collects in his absence, she shall not be able to collect without an oath.” Can one collect from a person in his absence? Rebbi Jeremiah said, explain it about a contract for which interest is due. Would the court collect interest? Explain that it was guaranteed for a Gentile. It was stated: If an heir’s father held a partially paid promissory note, the son collects without swearing. In this the son’s power is greater than the father’s since the father can collect only by swearing. Rebbi Eleazar said, nevertheless he has to execute an heir’s oath, “that our father did not charge us, that our father did not tell us, that we did not find a document among our father’s documents stating that this note was paid.” Therefore, if there was a document, the note was paid. Rebbi Hoshaia asked, does the baraita follow the House of Shammai? For the House of Shammai say, “she collects her ketubah and does not drink.” Rebbi Yose said, there the reason of the House of Shammai is: bring my husband and I shall drink! But here, it would be in order that even his father would not have to swear. They instituted a rule that he has to swear. They instituted this for him, but not for his son. When he died, you put his son on the biblical rule. If a father became obligated to swear in court and died, his son cannot collect. If it were otherwise, what could we say? Can a man let his son inherit an obligation to swear? Rebbi : Abun. Ba said, it was said as follows: if a man compromised his document in court, his son cannot collect. 7:6 (38a l. 25). Rav Ḥisda asked: Because he walked two steps, does he lose? If he compromised it outside the court, he collects. Because he compromised it in court, he cannot collect?

בֵּן סוֹרֵר וּמוֹרֶה נִדּוֹן עַל שֵׁם סוֹפוֹ. אָמְרָה תוֹרָה יָמוּת זַכַּאי וְאַל יָמוּת חַיָיב. שֶׁמִּיתָתָן שֶׁל רְשָׁעִים הֲנָיָיה לָהֶן וַהֲנָיָיה לָעוֹלָם וְהַצַּדִּיקִים רַע לָהֶן וְרַע לָעוֹלָם. יַיִן וְשֵׁינָה לָרְשָׁעִים הֲנָיָיה לָהֶן וַהֲנָיָיה לָעוֹלָם וְלַצַּדִּיקִים רַע לָהֶן וְרַע לָעוֹלָם. פִּזּוּר לָרְשָׁעִים הֲנָיָיה לָהֶן וַהֲנָיָיה לָעוֹלָם וְלַצַּדִּיקִים רַע לָהֶן וְרַע לָעוֹלָם. כִּינּוּס לָרְשָׁעִים רַע לָהֶן וְרַע לָעוֹלָם וְלַצַּדִּיקִים הֲנָיָיה לָהֶן וַהֲנָיָיה לָעוֹלָם. שֶׁקֶט לָרְשָׁעִים רַע לָהֶן וְרַע לָעוֹלָם וְלַצַּדִּיקִים הֲנָיָיה לָהֶן וַהֲנָיָיה לָעוֹלָם: בֵּן סוֹרֵר וּמוֹרֶה כול׳. צָפָה הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא שֶׁסּוֹף זֶה עָתִיד לְגַמֵּר נִיכְסֵי אָבִיו וְאֶת נִיכְסֵי אִמּוֹ וְיוֹשֵׁב לוֹ בְפָרָשַׁת דְּרָכִים וּמְקַפֵּחַ אֶת הַבִּרְיוֹת וְהוֹרֵג אֶת הַנְּפָשׁוּת וְסוֹפוֹ לְשַׁכֵּחַ אֶת תַּלְמוּדוֹ. וְאָמְרָה תוֹרָה מוּטָּב שֶׁיָּמוּת זַכַּאי וְאַל יָמוּת חַיָיב. שֶׁמִּיתָתָן שֶׁלָּרְשָׁעִים הֲנָיָיה לָהֶן וַהֲנָאָה לָעוֹלָם וְלַצַּדִּיקִים רַע לָהֶן וְרַע לָעוֹלָם. יַיִן וְשֵׁינָה לָרְשָׁעִים הֲנָיָיה לָהֶן וַהֲנָיָיה לָעוֹלָם וְלַצַּדִּיקִים רַע לָהֶן וְרַע לָעוֹלָם. אָמַר רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ. וּבִלְבַד יַיִן עִם רוֹב שֵׁינָה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹנָתָן. יְשֵׁינִים הֵן קִימְעָא מִפְּנֵי שֶׁתְּהֵא דַעְתָן מְיוּשֶּׁבֶת.

MISHNAH: The deviant and rebellious son is judged because of his end; the Torah said, it is better that he should die innocent rather than guilty, for death of the evildoers is an enjoyment for them and enjoyment for the world, but concerning the just it is bad for them and bad for the world. Wine and sleep of the evildoers is an enjoyment for them and enjoyment for the world, but concerning the just it is bad for them and bad for the world. Scattering of the evildoers is an enjoyment for them and enjoyment for the world, but concerning the just it is bad for them and bad for the world. Coming together of the evildoers is bad for them and bad for the world, but concerning the just it is an enjoyment for them and enjoyment for the world. Quiet of the evildoers is bad for them and bad for the world, but concerning the just it is an enjoyment for them and enjoyment for the world. HALAKHAH: “The deviant and rebellious son,” etc. The Holy One, praise to Him, saw that this one in the end will waste his father’s and his mother’s properties, will sit at road crossings, rob people, and kill them, and in the end will forget all he has learned. Therefore, the Torah said, he should die innocent rather than die guilty, for death of the evildoers is an enjoyment for them and enjoyment for the world, but concerning the just it is bad for them and bad for the world. “Wine and sleep of the evildoers is an enjoyment for them and enjoyment for the world, but concerning the just it is bad for them and bad for the world.” Rebbi Abbahu said, only wine with an excess of sleep. Rebbi Jonathan said, they sleep a little so they can concentrate better.

הַבָּא בַמַּחְתֶּרֶת נִידּוֹן עַל שֵׁם סוֹפוֹ. הָיָה בָא בַמַּחְתֶּרֶת וְשָׁבַר אֶת הֶחָבִית אִם יֵשׁ לוֹ דָמִים חַיָיב אִם אֵין לוֹ דָמִים פָּטוּר: הַבָּא בַמַּחְתֶּרֶת כול׳. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל. זֶה אֶחָד מִשְׁלֹשָׁה מִקְרִיּוֹת שֶׁנֶּאֶמְרוּ בַתּוֹרָה כְמָשָׁל. אִם יָקוּם וְהִתְהַלֵּךְ בַּחוּץ עַל מִשְׁעַנְתּוֹ. אִם בַּמַּחְתֶּרֶת יִמָּצֵא הַגַּנָּב. אִם זָרְחָה הַשֶּׁמֶשׁ עָלָיו דָּמִים לוֹ. וְכִי עָלָיו לְבַדּוֹ הַחַמָּה זוֹרַחַת. וַהֲלֹא עַל כָּל בָּאֵי הָעוֹלָם זוֹרַחַת הַחַמָּה. אֶלָּא מַה זְרִיחַת הַחַמָּה מְיוּחֶדֶת שֶׁהוּא שָׁלוֹם לְכָל בָּאֵי הָעוֹלָם. כָּךְ כָּל זְמַן שֶׁאַתְּ יוֹדֵעַ שֶׁאַתְּ שָׁלוֹם מִמֶּנּוּ בֵּין בַּיּוֹם וּבֵין בַּלַּיְלָה הַהוֹרְגוֹ נֶהֱרַג. פְּעָמִים שֶּׁהוּא בָא לִגְנוֹב פְּעָמִים שֶּׁהוּא בָא לַהֲרוֹג. אָמְרָת שֶׁאִם בָּא לִגְנוֹב וַודַּאי וַהֲרָגוֹ הַהוֹרְגוֹ נֶהֱרַג. פְּעָמִים שֶּׁהוּא בָא לַהֲרוֹג נֶהֱרַג. מִיכָּן אַתְּ דָן לְפִיקּוּחַ נֶפֶשׁ. לוֹמַר. מַה עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה מְיוּחֶדֶת שֶׁהִיא מְטַמְּאָה אֶת הָאָרֶץ וּמְחַלֶּלֶת אֶת הַשֵּׁם וּמְסַלֶּקֶת אֶת הַשְּׁכִינָה ודוֹחִין בָּהּ אֶת הַסָּפֵק. כָּל שֶׁכֵּן לְפִיקּוּחַ נֶפֶשׁ שֶׁיִּדְחֶה אֶת הַסָּפֵק. כְּתִיב אִם בַּמַּחְתֶּרֶת יִמָּצֵא הַגַּנָּב וְהֻכָּה וָמֵת אֵין לוֹ דָּמִים. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי חִיָיה. בַּמַּחְתֶּרֶת אֵין לוֹ דָּמִים חוּץ לַמַּחְתֶּרֶת יֵשׁ לוֹ דָּמִים. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי. אֲפִילוּ חוּץ לַמַּחְתֶּרֶת אֵין לוֹ דָּמִים. לְפִי שֶׁמָּמוֹנוֹ שֶׁל אָדָם חָבִיב עָלָיו כְנַפְשׁוֹ. חֲמִי לֵיהּ אֲזִיל בָּעֵי מֵיסַב מָמוֹנֵיהּ מִינֵּיהּ וְקָאִים עֲלוֹי וְקָטְלֵיהּ. רַב הוּנָא אָמַר. נָטַל אֶת הַכִּיס וְהָפַךְ אֶת פָּנָיו לָצֵאת וְהָלַךְ לוֹ וְעָמַד עָלָיו וַהֲרָגוֹ אֵין הַהוֹרְגוֹ נֶהֱרַג. מַה טַעֲמָא דְרַב הוּנָא. כִּי יֵחַם לְבָבוֹ. רַב אָמַר. כָּל דְּיֵיתֵי עֲלַי אֲנָא קְטַל לֵיהּ חוּץ מֵחֲנַנְיָה בֶן שִׁילָא דַּאֲנָא יְדַע דְלָא אֲתִי אֶלָּא מֵיסַב מְגוּסָתֵיהּ מִינַּיי. אֲמַר רִבִּי יִצְחָק. מִכֵּיוָן דְּאַבְרֵי לִיבֵּיהּ עֲלוֹי לְמֵיעֲבֲד לֵיהּ דָּא מִילְּתָא אֵין זֶה חֲנַנְיָה בֶן שִׁילָא.

MISHNAH: The intruder by stealth is judged because of his end. 22:1 permits the residents of a house to kill the stealth intruder since it is assumed that he would kill anybody offering resistance to his burglary. . If in the course of a burglary he broke an amphora, if he has blood-guilt attached to him. 22:2. , he is liable. 22:2 . ; if he has no blood-guilt attached to him, he is not liable. HALAKHAH: “The intruder by stealth,” etc. 13, dR. Simeon ben Iohai p. 192, Sifry Deut . 217; partially Yerushalmi Ketubot 4:4 (Notes 88–93 ). Rebbi Ismael stated: This is one of three verses. 21:19 and 22:2 mentioned here one has to add Deut . 22:17 . which in the Torah have been formulated as a simile: If he gets up and walks outside on his support . 21:19 . . If the thief is found in the digging, if the sun shone on him, he has blood . 22:2 . . Does the sun shine only on him? Does the sun not shine on all beings in the world? But just as sunshine is special in that it brings peace to the entire world, so in any case in which you know that you are at peace with him, whether it be day or night his killer will be killed. If sometimes he comes to steal, sometimes he comes to kill, you say that if certainly he comes to steal, his killer will be killed? Since sometimes he comes to kill, he may be killed. From here you argue about danger to life, to say that just as (foreign worship) has to be deleted since Mishnah 9 states clearly that a person intent on idolatry cannot be killed before he acts. One must read שְׁפִיכוּת דָּמִים “bloodshed” which defiles the Land ( Num . 35:33 ; Babli Šabbat 33a , Yoma 85a ); by Mishnah 9 a person intent on committing murder may be killed by any bystander before he commits the murder. If a person with a drawn sword runs after another, it is only a surmise but one which allows the bystander to kill the attacker; maybe the pursuer would not kill his victim. This is the “action in doubt“ referred to in this sentence. is special in that it defiles the Land, desecrates the Name, removes the Divine Presence, and doubts are disregarded, so much more that doubts have to be disregarded in cases of danger to life. It is written: If the thief was found in a tunnel, was smitten, and died, there is no blood-guilt . 22:1 permits the residents of a house to kill the stealth intruder since it is assumed that he would kill anybody offering resistance to his burglary. . Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: In the tunnel there is no blood-guilt, outside the tunnel there is blood guilt. Rebbi Simeon ben Ioḥai stated: Even outside the tunnel there is no blood-guilt, for a person’s property is beloved by him like his own soul. He sees him, that he comes to take his money away from him, stands up against him and kills him 85b . . Rav Huna said, if he took a wallet, turned to leave and went, if then one stood up against him and killed him the killer will not be killed. What is Rav Huna’s reason? For his temper is hot . 19:6 , another case of non-prosecutable homicide. . Rav said, I would kill anybody who would come against me, except Ḥanania ben Shila 10:8). , of whom I know that he would come only to take his meal from me. Rebbi Isaac said, if he has the temerity to do something like that, he cannot be Ḥanania ben Shila.

וְאֵילּוּ שֶׁמַּצִּילִין אוֹתָן בְּנַפְשָׁן. הָרוֹדֵף אַחַר חֲבֵירוֹ לְהוֹרְגוֹ אַחַר הַזָּכָר וְאַחַר נַעֲרָה הַמְאוֹרָסָה. אֲבָל הָרוֹדֵף אַחַר הַבְּהֵמָה וְהַמְחַלֵּל אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת וְהָעוֹבֵד עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה אֵין מַצִּילִין אוֹתָן בְּנַפְשָׁן: אֵילּוּ שֶׁמַּצִּילִין אוֹתָן בְּנַפְשָׁן כול׳. הָרוֹדֵף אַחַר חֲבֵירוֹ לְהוֹרְגוֹ בֵּין בַּבַּיִת בֵּין בַּשָּׂדֶה מַצִּילִין אוֹתוֹ בְנַפְשׁוֹ. אֶחָד הָרוֹדֵף אַחַר חֲבֵירוֹ לְהוֹרְגוֹ וְאֶחָד הָרוֹדֵף אַחַר כָּל שְׁאָר עֲבֵירוֹת שֶׁבַּתּוֹרָה מַצִּילִין אוֹתוֹ בְּנַפְשׁוֹ. אֲבָל אִם הָיְתָה אַלְמָנָה לְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל. גְּרוּשָׁה וַחֲלוּצָה לְכֹהֵן הֶדְיוֹט. מַמְזֶרֶת וּנְתִינָה לְיִשְׂרָאֵל. בַּת יִשְׂרָאֵל לְנָתִין וּלְמַמְזֵר. אֵין מַצִּילִין אוֹתוֹ בְנַפְשׁוֹ. נַעֲשֶׂה הַמַּעֲשֶׂה אֵין מַצִּילִין אוֹתוֹ בְנַפְשׁוֹ. אִם יֵשׁ שָׁם מוֹשִׁיעִים אֵין מַצִּילִין אוֹתוֹ בְנַפְשׁוֹ. רִבִּי יוּדָה אוֹמֵר. אִם אָמְרָה. הַנַּח לוֹ. אֵין מַצִּילִין אוֹתוֹ בְנַפְשׁוֹ. שֶׁאִם מְמָחִין הֵן עַל יָדָיו נִמְצְאוּ בָאִין לִידֵי שְׁפִיכוּת דָּמִים. פְּשִׁיטָא דָא מִילְּתָא. רוֹצֵחַ שֶׁשִּׁיבֵּר אֶת הַכֵּלִים אוֹ שֶׁהִזִּיק חַיָיב לְשַׁלֵּם. הָיָה מְשַׁבֵּר עַד שֶׁהוּא מַגִּיעַ לָעִיר. רִבִּי זְעִירָא וְרִבִּי הוּשַׁעְיָה. חַד אָמַר. נוֹתֵן דָּמִים. וְחָרָנָא אָמַר. אֵינוֹ נוֹתֵן דָּמִים. רוּדֵף שֶׁנַּעֲשֶׂה נִרְדָּף מָהוּ לְהַצִּיל אֶת הַרוֹדֵף בְנַפְשׁוֹ שֶׁלְּנִרְדָּף. גָּדוֹל שֶׁנַּעֲשֶׂה קָטוֹן מָהוּ לְהַצִּיל אֶת הַגָּדוֹל בְנַפְשׁוֹ שֶׁלְּקָטָן. הָתִיב רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה. וְהָתַנִּינָן. יָצָא רֹאשׁוֹ וְרוּבּוֹ אֵין נוֹגְעִין בּוֹ. שֶׁאֵין דּוֹחִין נֶפֶשׁ מִפְּנֵי נֶפֶשׁ. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי בּוּן בְּשֵׁם רַב חִסְדָּא. שַׁנְיָיא הִיא תַמָּן שֶׁאֵין אַתְּ יוֹדֵעַ מִי הָרַג אֶת מִי. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי לָעְזָר בֵּירִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר. הַהוֹלֵךְ לַעֲבוֹד עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה מַצִּילִין אוֹתוֹ בְנַפְשׁוֹ. אִם מִפְּנֵי כְבוֹד בָּשָׂר וָדָם מַצִּילִין אוֹתוֹ בְנַפְשׁוֹ לֹא כָּל שֶׁכֵּן מִפְּנֵי חַי הָעוֹלָמִים.

MISHNAH: The following ones one saves at the cost of their own persons: He who purses another to kill him, the male, or the preliminarily married virgin girl. 22:26 . . But he who pursues an animal. , or who desecrates the Sabbath, or who worships strange worship, one may not save at the cost of their own persons. HALAKHAH: “The following ones one saves at the cost of their own persons” etc. “He who pursues another to kill him, whether in a house or on the field one saves at the cost of his own person, both him who pursues another to kill him or him who pursues any of the transgressions make it likely that one should not read עֲבֵירוֹת “transgressions” but עֲרָיוֹת“nakednesses; acts of incest and adultery which constitute either capital crimes or deadly sins.” in the Torah one saves at the cost of his own person. But if it was a widow for a High Priest, a divorcee or one who had received ḥalîṣah for a common priest, a bastard or a Gibeonite for an Israel, an Israel woman for a bastard or a Gibeonite, one does not save him at the cost of his own person. If the deed had been done, one does not save him at the cost of his own person. If there are people to save her, one does not save him at the cost of his own person. Rebbi Jehudah says, if she said, let him do it, one does not save at the cost of his own person. For if they would injure him, they through him would come to spill blood.” The following is obvious: A murderer who broke vessels or otherwise caused damage is liable to pay 7:1 Notes 3–73 , Ketubot 3:1 Note 29 ; Babli Ketubot 32b , Bava qamma 36a , Makkot 7b , 13b ), any damage done during the commission of a crime cannot be recovered from the criminal. Any damage caused before and after the crime has been committed can be recovered. The only question, the subject of the next two sentences, is whether the pursuit of the victim is part of the crime and protects the murderer from damage claims or not. . If he continued to break until he came to the town, Rebbi Zeˋira and Rebbi Hoshaia: One said, he pays, the other said, he does not pay. If the pursuer becomes the pursued, may one save the pursuer through the person of the pursued? An adult (who became) 14 (14d l. 67), the question is attributed to Rav Hisda, mentioned later here also. a minor, may one save the adult through the person of the minor? Rebbi Jeremiah objected, did we not state 7:6 . If the life of the mother is endangered during childbirth, the attendants must kill the fetus by cutting it into pieces and removing it. But if head and torso are already outside, so that the baby is breathing on his own, he cannot be killed even if he is endangering his mother’s life. This is a case of a minor pursuing an adult. : “If his head and most of his body were born, one does not touch him, for one does not push aside one life for another.” Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said in the name of Rav Ḥisda: It is different there since you do not know who is killing whom. It was stated: “Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon says, one who goes to worship a strange worship is saved at the cost of his own person.“ If one saves at the cost of his own person to protect the honor of flesh and blood, so much more because of the Life of the World 12:7 . The vocalization חַי is standard Sephardic; traditional Ashkenazic is חֵי (cf. M. Hershler, Siddur of R. Solomon ben Samson of Garmaise including the Siddur of the Haside Ashkenas , Jerusalem 1971, pp. 21–22.) .