## Avodah Zarah Daf 53a

###### Avodah Zarah 53a:1
[Avodah Zarah 53a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Avodah%20Zarah/r/53a:1)

דְּרַבִּי וָולֶס: לֹא נִצְרְכָה שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ בָּהּ שׁוּתָּפוּת, וְקָא מַשְׁמַע לַן יִשְׂרָאֵל הוּא דְּלָא מְבַטֵּל דְּנׇכְרִי, אֲבָל נׇכְרִי דְּנַפְשֵׁיהּ מְבַטֵּל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**of Rabbi Volas: No,** this *halakha* is **necessary** in a case **where** the gentile **has partnership in** the idol, **and** it **teaches us** that **it is** only **a Jew who cannot revoke** the status of **a gentile’s** object of idol worship. **But a gentile** can **revoke** the status of **his own** object of idol worship.


###### Avodah Zarah 53a:2
[Avodah Zarah 53a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Avodah%20Zarah/r/53a:2)

אִיכָּא דְּמַתְנֵי לַהּ אַבָּרַיְיתָא, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן מְנַסְיָא אוֹמֵר: עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל אֵין לָהּ בְּטִילָה עוֹלָמִית. מַאי ״עוֹלָמִית״? אָמַר רַבִּי הִילֵּל בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי וָולֶס: לֹא נִצְרְכָה, אֶלָּא שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ לְגוֹי בָּהּ שׁוּתָּפוּת, וְקָא מַשְׁמַע לַן דְּיִשְׂרָאֵל אַדַּעְתָּא דְּנַפְשֵׁיהּ פָּלַח.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**There are those who teach** Rabbi Hillel’s statement **with regard to a *baraita*: Rabbi Shimon ben Menasya says:** The status of **a Jew’s** object of **idol worship can never be revoked. What** is the reason for the additional emphasis of the term **never? Rabbi Hillel, son of Rabbi Volas, says:** The emphasis **is necessary only** for a case **where the gentile has partnership in** the idol, **and** it **teaches us that** the **Jew worships** the idol **based on his own intentions,** and therefore although the gentile revokes the status of his share, the Jew’s share remains forbidden.


###### Avodah Zarah 53a:3
[Avodah Zarah 53a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Avodah%20Zarah/r/53a:3)

**מַתְנִי׳** כֵּיצַד מְבַטְּלָהּ? קָטַע רֹאשׁ אׇזְנָהּ, רֹאשׁ חוֹטְמָהּ, רֹאשׁ אֶצְבָּעָהּ, פְּחָסָהּ — אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא חִיסְּרָהּ — בִּיטְּלָהּ; רָק בְּפָנֶיהָ, הִשְׁתִּין בְּפָנֶיהָ, גֵּרְרָהּ, זָרַק בָּהּ אֶת הַצּוֹאָה — הֲרֵי זוֹ אֵינָהּ בְּטֵילָה; מְכָרָהּ אוֹ מִשְׁכְּנָהּ — רַבִּי אוֹמֵר: בִּיטֵּל, וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: לֹא בִּיטֵּל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** **How does** a gentile **revoke** the status of an object of idol worship? If **he cut off the tip of its ear,** or **the tip of its nose,** or **its fingertip;** or if **he crushed it, even though he did not remove** any **part of it,** in all these cases he thereby **revoked** its status as an object of idol worship. If he **spat before** the idol, **urinated before it, dragged it** on the ground, or **threw excrement at it,** the status of **this** idol **is not revoked,** as this is only a temporary display of scorn, and afterward the gentile might continue to worship the idol. If the gentile **sold it or mortgaged it, Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **says:** He thereby **revoked** its status. **And the Rabbis say** that he **did not revoke** its status.


###### Avodah Zarah 53a:4
[Avodah Zarah 53a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Avodah%20Zarah/r/53a:4)

**גְּמָ׳** כִּי לֹא חִיסְּרָהּ, בְּמַאי בִּיטְּלָהּ? אָמַר רַב זֵירָא: שֶׁפְּחָסָהּ בְּפָנֶיהָ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The mishna teaches that if the gentile crushed the idol without removing any part of it, the status of the idol is revoked. The Gemara asks: In a case **where he did not remove** any **part of it, by what** action **did he revoke** its status? **Rav Zeira says:** The mishna is referring to a case **where he crushed its face** with a hammer, destroying its form, even though none of its stone was removed.


###### Avodah Zarah 53a:5
[Avodah Zarah 53a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Avodah%20Zarah/r/53a:5)

רָקַק בְּפָנֶיהָ, וְהִשְׁתִּין בְּפָנֶיהָ. מְנָהָנֵי מִילֵּי?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: If he **spat before** the idol **or urinated before it,** the status of this idol is not revoked, as this is only a temporary display of scorn. The Gemara asks: **From where are these matters** derived?


###### Avodah Zarah 53a:6
[Avodah Zarah 53a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Avodah%20Zarah/r/53a:6)

אָמַר חִזְקִיָּה, דְּאָמַר קְרָא: ״וְהָיָה כִי יִרְעַב וְהִתְקַצַּף וְקִלֵּל בְּמַלְכּוֹ וּבֵאלֹהָיו וּפָנָה לְמַעְלָה״, וּכְתִיב בָּתְרֵיהּ: ״וְאֶל אֶרֶץ יַבִּיט וְהִנֵּה צָרָה וַחֲשֵׁכָה וְגוֹ׳״, דְּאַף עַל גַּב דְּקִלֵּל מַלְכּוֹ וֵאלֹהָיו וּפָנָה לְמַעְלָה, אֶל אֶרֶץ יַבִּיט.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Ḥizkiyya says:** This is derived from a verse, **as the verse states: “And it shall come to pass that, when he shall be hungry, he shall fret, and curse his king and his god, and turn his face upward”** (Isaiah 8:21). **And it is written after** this verse: **“And he shall look to the earth, and behold distress and darkness,** the gloom of anguish, and outspread thick darkness” (Isaiah 8:22). This indicates **that even though he cursed his king and his** idolatrous **god, and** he **turned his face upward** to God, nevertheless, **he** subsequently **looks to the earth** and beholds distress and darkness, since he returns to his idol worship.


###### Avodah Zarah 53a:7
[Avodah Zarah 53a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Avodah%20Zarah/r/53a:7)

מְכָרָהּ אוֹ מִשְׁכְּנָהּ, רַבִּי אוֹמֵר: בִּיטֵּל וְכוּ׳. זְעֵירִי אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן, וְרַבִּי יִרְמְיָה בַּר אַבָּא אָמַר רַב, חַד אָמַר: מַחְלוֹקֶת בְּצוֹרֵף גּוֹי, אֲבָל בְּצוֹרֵף יִשְׂרָאֵל — דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל בִּיטֵּל, וְחַד אָמַר: בְּצוֹרֵף יִשְׂרָאֵל מַחְלוֹקֶת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: If the gentile **sold it or mortgaged it, Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **says:** He thereby **revoked** its status. And the Rabbis say that he did not revoke its status. The Gemara cites a dispute between that which **Ze’eiri** says that **Rabbi Yoḥanan says, and** that which **Rabbi Yirmeya bar Abba** says that **Rav says. One says:** The **dispute** between Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and the Rabbis applies only **when** the gentile sold his idol to **a gentile smith. But when** he sold it to **a Jewish smith everyone agrees** that by selling the idol the gentile **revoked** its status, as he knows that the Jewish smith will certainly melt it down. **And one says:** The **dispute** applies **to** the case where he sold the idol to **a Jewish smith.**


###### Avodah Zarah 53a:8
[Avodah Zarah 53a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Avodah%20Zarah/r/53a:8)

אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: בְּצוֹרֵף יִשְׂרָאֵל מַחְלוֹקֶת, אֲבָל צוֹרֵף גּוֹי דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל לֹא בִּיטֵּל, אוֹ דִלְמָא בֵּין בָּזֶה וּבֵין בָּזֶה מַחְלוֹקֶת?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**A dilemma was raised before** the Sages: According to the second opinion, does the **dispute** apply only **to** the case where he sold the idol to **a Jewish smith; but** if he sold it to **a gentile smith everyone agrees** that he **did not revoke** its status by selling it? **Or perhaps both in this** case **and in that** case there is **a dispute.**


###### Avodah Zarah 53a:9
[Avodah Zarah 53a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Avodah%20Zarah/r/53a:9)

תָּא שְׁמַע, דְּאָמַר רַבִּי: נִרְאִין דְּבָרַיי כְּשֶׁמְּכָרָהּ לְחַבְּלָהּ, וְדִבְרֵי חֲבֵירַיי שֶׁמְּכָרָהּ לְעוֹבְדָהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara replies: **Come** and **hear** a *baraita*, **as Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **said: My statement** that by selling the idol the gentile revokes its status **appears** correct in a case **where he sold it for** the purpose of **destruction, and the statement of my colleagues** that its status is not revoked appears correct in a case **where he sold it for** the purpose of **worship.**


###### Avodah Zarah 53a:10
[Avodah Zarah 53a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Avodah%20Zarah/r/53a:10)

מַאי ״לְחַבְּלָהּ״ וּמַאי ״לְעוֹבְדָהּ״? אִילֵּימָא לְחַבְּלָהּ — לְחַבְּלָהּ מַמָּשׁ, לְעוֹבְדָהּ — לְעוֹבְדָהּ מַמָּשׁ, מַאי טַעְמָא דְּמַאן דְּאָמַר בִּיטֵּל, וּמַאי טַעְמָא דְּמַאן דְּאָמַר לֹא בִּיטֵּל?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains the *baraita*: **What** is the meaning of selling the idol **for destruction, and what** is the meaning of selling it **for worship? If we say** that selling it **for destruction** means **literally** that he knew that it was being bought **for** the purpose of **destruction,** and that selling it **for worship** means **literally** that it was bought **for** the purpose of **worship,** this is difficult. **What is the reasoning of the one who says** that the gentile **revoked** the idol’s status even though he knew that the buyer intended to worship it, **and what is the reasoning of the one who says** that he **did not revoke** its status even though he knew that the buyer intended to destroy it?


###### Avodah Zarah 53a:11
[Avodah Zarah 53a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Avodah%20Zarah/r/53a:11)

אֶלָּא לָאו לְחַבְּלָהּ — לְמִי שֶׁעָתִיד לְחַבְּלָהּ, וּמַנּוּ? צוֹרֵף יִשְׂרָאֵל. לְעוֹבְדָהּ — לְמִי שֶׁעָתִיד לְעוֹבְדָהּ, וּמַנּוּ? צוֹרֵף גּוֹי. וּשְׁמַע מִינַּהּ: בֵּין בָּזֶה וּבֵין בָּזֶה מַחְלוֹקֶת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, is it not** referring to a case where the buyer’s intentions were not known with certainty? And accordingly, selling the idol **for destruction** means selling it **to one who will** presumably **destroy it in the future. And who is that** buyer? This is referring to **a Jewish smith.** Similarly, selling the idol **for worship** means selling it **to one who will** presumably **worship it in the future. And who is that** buyer? This is referring to **a gentile smith.** Since Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi states that his opinion appears correct in the case of a Jewish smith and the opinion of his colleagues appears correct in the case of a gentile smith, one **may conclude from** the *baraita* that there is **a dispute both in this** case **and in that** case.


###### Avodah Zarah 53a:12
[Avodah Zarah 53a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Avodah%20Zarah/r/53a:12)

לָא, הָכִי קָאָמַר: אָמַר רַבִּי: נִרְאִין דְּבָרַיי לַחֲבֵירַיי כְּשֶׁמְּכָרָהּ לְחַבְּלָהּ. וּמַנּוּ? צוֹרֵף יִשְׂרָאֵל, שֶׁאַף חֲבֵירַיי לֹא נֶחְלְקוּ עָלַי אֶלָּא כְּשֶׁמְּכָרָהּ לְעוֹבְדָהּ, אֲבָל לְחַבְּלָהּ — מוֹדוּ לִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this suggestion: **No, this** is what the *baraita* **is saying: Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **said: My statement** that the idol’s status is revoked **appears to my colleagues** correct in a case **where he sold it for** the purpose of **destruction. And who is it** who buys the idol with the intent of destroying it? This is referring to **a Jewish smith.** This is **because even my colleagues disagreed with me only** in a case **where he sold it for** the purpose of **worship; but** when he sold it to a Jewish smith **for** the purpose of **destruction, they concede to my** opinion.


###### Avodah Zarah 53a:13
[Avodah Zarah 53a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Avodah%20Zarah/r/53a:13)

מֵיתִיבִי: הַלּוֹקֵחַ גְּרוּטָאוֹת מִן הַגּוֹיִם וּמָצָא בָּהֶן עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, אִם עַד שֶׁלֹּא נָתַן מָעוֹת מָשַׁךְ — יַחֲזִיר, אִם מִשֶּׁנָּתַן מָעוֹת מָשַׁךְ — יוֹלִיךְ לְיָם הַמֶּלַח.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara **raises an objection** from a *baraita*: With regard to **one who buys broken vessels** made from gold or silver **from the gentiles and finds among them** an object of **idol worship, if he pulled** the object of idol worship, thereby performing an act of acquisition, **before he gave** the **money** to the gentile, **he may return** the object of idol worship to the gentile. But **if he pulled** it **after he gave** the **money** to the gentile he may not return it. Since the idol’s status was not revoked, he must **take** it and cast it **into the Dead Sea.**


###### Avodah Zarah 53a:14
[Avodah Zarah 53a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Avodah%20Zarah/r/53a:14)

אִי אָמְרַתְּ בִּשְׁלָמָא בְּצוֹרֵף יִשְׂרָאֵל מַחְלוֹקֶת, הָא מַנִּי? רַבָּנַן הִיא. אֶלָּא אִי אָמְרַתְּ בְּצוֹרֵף גּוֹי מַחְלוֹקֶת, אֲבָל בְּצוֹרֵף יִשְׂרָאֵל דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל בִּיטֵּל, הָא מַנִּי?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains the objection: **Granted, if you say** that **in** the case of a gentile who sells an object of idol worship to **a Jewish smith** there is **a dispute** between Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and the Rabbis, the *baraita* is not difficult. In accordance with **whose** opinion **is this** *baraita*? **It is** in accordance with the opinion of **the Rabbis,** who hold that when a gentile sells an idol to a Jewish smith he does not thereby revoke its status. **But if you say** that the **dispute** between Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and the Rabbis applies only **when** the idol is sold to **a gentile smith, but in** the case of **a Jewish smith everyone agrees** that the gentile **revoked** the idol’s status, then in accordance with **whose** opinion **is this** *baraita*?


###### Avodah Zarah 53a:15
[Avodah Zarah 53a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Avodah%20Zarah/r/53a:15)

שָׁאנֵי הָתָם, דְּאַדַּעְתָּא דִּגְרוּטָאוֹת זַבֵּין, אַדַּעְתָּא דַּעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה לָא זַבֵּין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: It **is different there, as** the gentile **sold** the metal **with the understanding that** he was selling **broken vessels,** and **he did not sell** the metal **with the understanding that** he was selling an object of **idol worship.** He therefore had no intention of revoking its status.


###### Avodah Zarah 53a:16
[Avodah Zarah 53a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Avodah%20Zarah/r/53a:16)

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: לָוָה עָלֶיהָ, אוֹ שֶׁנָּפְלָה עָלֶיהָ מַפּוֹלֶת, אוֹ שֶׁגְּנָבוּהָ לִיסְטִין, אוֹ שֶׁהִנִּיחוּהָ הַבְּעָלִים וְהָלְכוּ לִמְדִינַת הַיָּם,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **The Sages taught:** If a gentile **borrowed** money **against** an object of idol worship, using it as collateral, **or** with regard to another case **where a rockslide fell on it, or** a case **where robbers stole it, or** a case **where the owners abandoned it and went overseas,** the following *halakha* applies: