## Sanhedrin Daf 36a

###### Sanhedrin 36a:1
[Sanhedrin 36a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/36a:1)

מָה יוֹם טוֹב שֶׁנִּדְחֶה מִפְּנֵי קׇרְבַּן יָחִיד, אֵין רְצִיחָה דּוֹחָה אוֹתוֹ. קׇרְבַּן יָחִיד שֶׁהוּא דּוֹחֶה אֶת יוֹם טוֹב, אֵינוֹ דִּין שֶׁלֹּא תְּהֵא רְצִיחָה דּוֹחָה אוֹתוֹ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Just as** with regard to **a Festival, which is overridden due to an offering of an individual,** as voluntary offerings of individuals are sacrificed on Festivals, and nevertheless **murder does not override it,** as the court does not execute one liable to receive court-imposed capital punishment on a Festival, with regard to **an offering of an individual, which overrides a Festival, is it not logical that murder should not override it?** Therefore, unlike the explanation of Abaye, the court should not take a priest to execute him in the event he is liable to receive capital punishment if this will result in the offering of an individual not being sacrificed.


###### Sanhedrin 36a:2
[Sanhedrin 36a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/36a:2)

הָנִיחָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר אֵין נְדָרִים וּנְדָבוֹת קְרֵיבִין בְּיוֹם טוֹב, אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר נְדָרִים וּנְדָבוֹת קְרֵיבִין בְּיוֹם טוֹב – מַאי אִיכָּא לְמֵימַר?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rava clarifies: **This works out well according to the one who says** that **vow** offerings **and gift** offerings of individuals **are not sacrificed on a Festival.** Since the offerings of an individual do not override a Festival, there is no place for this *a fortiori* inference. **But according to the one who says** that **vow** offerings **and gift** offerings of individuals **are sacrificed on a Festival, what is there to say?** Why would one not make the above *a fortiori* inference?


###### Sanhedrin 36a:3
[Sanhedrin 36a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/36a:3)

אֶלָּא אָמַר רָבָא: לָא מִיבַּעְיָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר נְדָרִים וּנְדָבוֹת קְרֵיבִין בְּיוֹם טוֹב, דְּהָא לָא מִתְקַיֵּים ״מֵעִם מִזְבְּחִי״ כְּלָל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, Rava says** that Abaye’s explanation of the verse is incorrect according to all opinions. It is **not necessary** to say that the inference is incorrect **according to the one who says** that **vow** offerings **and gift** offerings of individuals **are sacrificed on a Festival, as** according to that opinion one **cannot justify** the verse of **“from My altar” at all,** as there is no distinction between the offering of an individual and a communal offering, as both override a Festival. Accordingly, court-imposed capital punishment should not override either type of offering.


###### Sanhedrin 36a:4
[Sanhedrin 36a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/36a:4)

אֶלָּא אֲפִילּוּ לְמַאן דְּאָמַר: נְדָרִים וּנְדָבוֹת אֵין קְרֵיבִין בְּיוֹם טוֹב, הָכְתִיב ״מֵעִם מִזְבְּחִי״ – מִזְבְּחִי הַמְיוּחָד לִי, וּמַאי נִינְהוּ? תָּמִיד. וְאָמַר רַחֲמָנָא: ״מֵעִם מִזְבְּחִי תִּקָּחֶנּוּ לָמוּת״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**But even according to the one who says** that **vow** offerings **and gift** offerings of individuals **are not sacrificed on a Festival,** in which case Abaye’s explanation is possible, this is difficult. **But isn’t it written: “From My altar”?** The term “My altar” indicates: **My altar,** the offering **that is designated to Me. And what** offering **is this?** It is **the daily offering. And** yet, **the Merciful One states: “You shall take him from My altar, that he may die.”** Accordingly, the verse is not stated specifically with regard to an offering of an individual.


###### Sanhedrin 36a:5
[Sanhedrin 36a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/36a:5)

דִּינֵי מָמוֹנוֹת, הַטְּמָאוֹת וְהַטְּהָרוֹת כּוּ׳. אָמַר רַב: אֲנָא הֲוַאי בְּמִנְיָנָא דְּבֵי רַבִּי, וּמִינַּאי דִּידִי הֲווֹ מַתְחֲלִי בְּרֵישָׁא. וְהָא אֲנַן ״מַתְחִילִין מִן הַגָּדוֹל״ תְּנַן!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches that in cases of **monetary law,** and likewise in **the** cases of **ritual impurity and purity,** the judges commence expressing their opinions from the greatest of the judges. **Rav says: I was among the quorum of judges in the school of Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi, **and they would commence from me,** i.e., I was **first** when ascertaining the opinions of the judges. The Gemara questions this statement: **But we learned** in the mishna that the judges **commence** expressing their opinions **from the greatest** of the judges, and Rav was one of the junior judges of that court.


###### Sanhedrin 36a:6
[Sanhedrin 36a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/36a:6)

אָמַר רַבָּה בְּרֵיהּ דְּרָבָא, וְאִיתֵּימָא רַבִּי הִלֵּל בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי וָולֶס: שָׁאנֵי מִנְיָינָא דְּבֵי רַבִּי, דְּכוּלְּהוּ מִנְיָנַיְיהוּ מִן הַצַּד הֲווֹ מַתְחֲלִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabba, son of Rava, says, and some say** that it was **Rabbi Hillel, son of Rabbi Valles,** who says: **The counting** of the vote in the court **in the school of Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **is different, as all of their** deliberations and the **counting** of the vote **would commence from the side** benches, where the least significant judges sit. This was because Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi was held in such high esteem that once he expressed his opinion, no one would be so brazen as to contradict him.


###### Sanhedrin 36a:7
[Sanhedrin 36a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/36a:7)

וְאָמַר רַבָּה בְּרֵיהּ דְּרָבָא, וְאִיתֵּימָא רַבִּי הִלֵּל בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי וָולֶס: מִימוֹת מֹשֶׁה וְעַד רַבִּי לֹא מָצִינוּ תּוֹרָה וּגְדוּלָּה בְּמָקוֹם אֶחָד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** with regard to the greatness of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, **Rabba, son of Rava, says, and some say** that it was **Rabbi Hillel, son of Rabbi Valles,** who says: **From the days of Moses and until** the days of **Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **we do not find** unparalleled greatness in **Torah** knowledge **and** unparalleled **greatness** in secular matters, including wealth and high political office, combined **in one place,** i.e., in a single individual.


###### Sanhedrin 36a:8
[Sanhedrin 36a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/36a:8)

וְלָא? הָא הֲוָה יְהוֹשֻׁעַ! הֲוָה אֶלְעָזָר. וְהָא הֲוָה פִּנְחָס! הֲווֹ זְקֵנִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But** was there **not** such a person? **Wasn’t there Joshua,** who was unparalleled in both domains? The Gemara answers: During his time **there was Elazar,** who was Joshua’s equal in Torah knowledge. The Gemara asks: **But wasn’t there Pinehas,** who outlived Elazar? The Gemara answers: **There were the Elders,** who were equal to Pinehas in Torah knowledge.


###### Sanhedrin 36a:9
[Sanhedrin 36a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/36a:9)

וְהָא הֲוָה שָׁאוּל! הֲוָה שְׁמוּאֵל. וְהָא נָח נַפְשֵׁיהּ! כּוּלְּהוּ שְׁנֵיהּ קָאָמְרִינַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara further objects: **But wasn’t there Saul,** who was unparalleled in both domains? The Gemara answers: **There was Samuel,** who was Saul’s equal in Torah knowledge. The Gemara asks: **But didn’t** Samuel **die** in Saul’s lifetime, leaving Saul the leading figure in both domains? The Gemara answers: **We** meant to **say** that from the days of Moses until the days of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi there was no other single individual who reigned supreme in Torah and greatness for **all the years** that he was the leader of the Jewish people.


###### Sanhedrin 36a:10
[Sanhedrin 36a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/36a:10)

וְהָא הֲוָה דָּוִד! הֲוָה עִירָא הַיָּאִירִי. וְהָא נָח נַפְשֵׁיהּ! כּוּלְּהוּ שְׁנֵיהּ קָאָמְרִינַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But wasn’t there David,** who was both the greatest Torah authority and the most powerful temporal authority of his day? The Gemara answers: **There was Ira the Yairite,** who was David’s equal in Torah knowledge. The Gemara objects: **But didn’t** Ira the Yairite **die** in David’s lifetime? The Gemara answers: **We** meant to **say** that there was no other single individual who reigned supreme in Torah and greatness for **all the years** that he was the leader of the Jewish people.


###### Sanhedrin 36a:11
[Sanhedrin 36a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/36a:11)

וְהָא הֲוָה שְׁלֹמֹה! הֲוָה שִׁמְעִי בֶּן גֵּרָא. וְהָא קַטְלֵיהּ! כּוּלֵּיהּ שְׁנֵיהּ קָאָמְרִינַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But wasn’t there Solomon,** who was unparalleled in both domains? The Gemara answers: During his day **there was Shimi ben Gera,** who was Solomon’s master in Torah knowledge. The Gemara objects: **But didn’t** Solomon **kill him** at the beginning of his reign (see I Kings, chapter 2)? The Gemara answers: **We** meant to **say** that there was no other single individual who reigned supreme in Torah and greatness for **all the years** that he was the leader of the Jewish people.


###### Sanhedrin 36a:12
[Sanhedrin 36a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/36a:12)

הָא הֲוָה חִזְקִיָּה! הֲוָה שֶׁבְנָא. וְהָא אִיקְּטִיל! כּוּלְּהוּ שְׁנֵיהּ קָאָמְרִינַן. וְהָא הֲוָה עֶזְרָא! הֲוָה נְחֶמְיָה בֶּן חֲכַלְיָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara further objects: **Wasn’t there Hezekiah,** who was both the leading Torah scholar of his age and also the king of his people? The Gemara answers: **There was Shebnah** in that generation, who was Hezekiah’s equal in Torah knowledge. The Gemara asks: **But wasn’t he killed** in the war against Sennacherib? The Gemara answers: **We** meant to **say** that there was no other single individual who reigned supreme in Torah and greatness for **all the years** that he was the leader of the Jewish people. The Gemara asks: **But wasn’t there Ezra,** who was the greatest Torah Sage of his day and the leader of the Jewish people? The Gemara answers: **There was Nehemiah, son of Hacaliah,** who was his equal.


###### Sanhedrin 36a:13
[Sanhedrin 36a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/36a:13)

אָמַר רַב אַדָּא בַּר אַהֲבָה: אַף אֲנִי אוֹמֵר, מִימוֹת רַבִּי עַד רַב אָשֵׁי לֹא מָצִינוּ תּוֹרָה וּגְדוּלָּה בְּמָקוֹם אֶחָד. וְלָא? וְהָא הֲוָה הוּנָא בַּר נָתָן! הוּנָא בַּר נָתָן מִיכָּף הֲוָה כַּיִיף לֵיהּ לְרַב אָשֵׁי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Adda bar Ahava says: I also say** a similar statement, that **from the days of Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **and until** the days of **Rav Ashi we do not find** unparalleled greatness in **Torah** knowledge **and** unparalleled **greatness** in secular matters, including wealth and high political office, combined **in one place,** i.e., in a single individual. The Gemara asks: **But** was there **not** such a person? **But wasn’t there Huna bar Natan,** who lived during the time of Rav Ashi and enjoyed both great Torah scholarship and great wealth? The Gemara answers: **Huna bar Natan was subordinate to Rav Ashi,** who was his superior in both domains.


###### Sanhedrin 36a:14
[Sanhedrin 36a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/36a:14)

דִּינֵי נְפָשׁוֹת מַתְחִילִין מִן הַצַּד. מְנָא הָנֵי מִילֵּי? אָמַר רַב אַחָא בַּר פָּפָּא: אָמַר קְרָא, ״לֹא תַעֲנֶה עַל רִב״. לֹא תַעֲנֶה עַל רַב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches that in cases of **capital law,** the judges **commence** issuing their opinions **from the side** benches, where the least significant judges sit. The Gemara asks: **From where are these matters** derived? **Rav Aḥa bar Pappa says: The verse states: “Neither shall you answer in a cause [*al riv*]”** (Exodus 23:2), and the Sages interpret: **Neither shall you answer after** the **Master [*al rav*],** i.e., do not dispute the opinion of the greatest among the judges. Therefore, were the judges to commence issuing their opinions from the greatest of them, and he would say that the accused is liable, no judge would acquit him.


###### Sanhedrin 36a:15
[Sanhedrin 36a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/36a:15)

רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן, מֵהָכָא: ״וַיֹּאמֶר דָּוִד לַאֲנָשָׁיו חִגְרוּ אִישׁ [אֶת] חַרְבּוֹ וַיַּחְגְּרוּ אִישׁ [אֶת] חַרְבּוֹ וַיַּחְגֹּר גַּם דָּוִד אֶת חַרְבּוֹ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabba bar bar Ḥana** says that **Rabbi Yoḥanan says:** The source of this practice is **from here:** When David decided to punish Nabal the Carmelite, the verse states: **“And David said to his men: Every man gird his sword. And every man girded his sword, and David also girded his sword”** (I Samuel 25:13). That was a case of capital law, and David, the greatest among them, was last.


###### Sanhedrin 36a:16
[Sanhedrin 36a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/36a:16)

אָמַר רַב: שׁוֹנֶה אָדָם לְתַלְמִידוֹ, וְדָן עִמּוֹ בְּדִינֵי נְפָשׁוֹת. מֵיתִיבִי: הַטְּהָרוֹת וְהַטְּמָאוֹת, הָאָב וּבְנוֹ, הָרַב וְתַלְמִידוֹ – מוֹנִין לָהֶם שְׁנַיִם. דִּינֵי מָמוֹנוֹת וְדִינֵי נְפָשׁוֹת וְדִינֵי מַכּוֹת, קִידּוּשׁ הַחֹדֶשׁ וְעִיבּוּר שָׁנָה – אָב וּבְנוֹ, הָרַב וְתַלְמִידוֹ, אֵין מוֹנִין לָהֶן אֶלָּא אֶחָד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav says: A person may teach his student** the relevant material **and** then **judge** cases of **capital law with him,** and this student can participate in the deliberations and serve as one of the judges. The Gemara **raises an objection** from a *baraita* (*Tosefta* 7:2): In cases of **ritual purity and impurity,** if two of the judges are **a father and his son,** or **a teacher and his student,** the court **counts them** as **two** opinions. By inference, in cases of **monetary law and** cases of **capital law, and** cases of **laws** involving the punishment **of lashes,** as well as court proceedings concerning **sanctification of the month and the intercalation of the year,** if two of the judges are **a father and his son,** or **a teacher and his student,** the court **counts them** as **only one** opinion, as it is assumed the son or student will merely echo the opinion of his father or teacher. This contradicts the ruling of Rav.