## Sanhedrin Daf 48b

###### Sanhedrin 48b:1
[Sanhedrin 48b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/48b:1)

הָתָם מִשּׁוּם מְרָרַיְיהוּ. אִי הָכִי, הַיְינוּ דְּקָתָנֵי עֲלַהּ: אָמַר רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל: בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים? שֶׁלֹּא נָגְעוּ בַּמִּטָּה, אֲבָל נָגְעוּ בַּמִּטָּה – אֲסוּרִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this proof: **There,** the parents threw the garments onto their son’s bier **because of their bitterness** over his death, but they did not really mean to designate the garments to be buried with him. The Gemara raises a difficulty: **If so,** how can one understand **that which is taught with regard to** this *baraita*: **Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said: In what** case **is this statement said?** It is stated with regard to a case **where** the garments **did not** yet **touch the bier** before they were saved. **But** if **they** already **touched the bier, they are forbidden.** If no importance is ascribed to what is done out of bitterness, why should the garments that touched the bier be forbidden?


###### Sanhedrin 48b:2
[Sanhedrin 48b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/48b:2)

תַּרְגְּמַהּ עוּלָּא: בְּמִטָּה הַנִּקְבֶּרֶת עִמּוֹ, דְּמִחַלְּפִי בְּתַכְרִיכִי הַמֵּת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Ulla interpreted** the *baraita* as referring to a case where the garments were thrown **onto a bier that was to be buried** together **with** the son, and it is possible **that** those garments might **be mistaken for shrouds of the deceased.** The Sages decreed that it is prohibited to derive benefit from such garments, lest people mistakenly think that just as they are permitted, so too, actual shrouds are permitted. There is no proof from here that mere designation is significant and that articles designated for the dead are permanently forbidden.


###### Sanhedrin 48b:3
[Sanhedrin 48b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/48b:3)

תָּא שְׁמַע: כִּיס שֶׁעֲשָׂאוֹ לְהַנִּיחַ בּוֹ תְּפִילִּין – אָסוּר לְהַנִּיחַ בּוֹ מָעוֹת. הִנִּיחַ בּוֹ תְּפִילִּין – יַנִּיחַ בּוֹ מָעוֹת. אֵימָא: עֲשָׂאוֹ וְהִנִּיחַ בּוֹ תְּפִילִּין – אָסוּר לְהַנִּיחַ בּוֹ מָעוֹת, כִּדְרַב חִסְדָּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **Come** and **hear** a proof in support of Abaye’s opinion from a *baraita*: If **one fashioned a pouch in which to put phylacteries, it is prohibited to put money in it.** If **he put phylacteries in it,** but he did not designate it beforehand for that purpose, **he may** still **put money in it.** The ruling of the first clause indicates that designation is significant. The Gemara rejects this proof: **Say** that the *baraita* should be understood as follows: If **one fashioned** a pouch for phylacteries **and** then **put the phylacteries in it, it is prohibited to put money in it.** This is **in accordance with** the ruling **of Rav Ḥisda,** that if one designated a cloth for the purpose of bundling phylacteries in it and then he wrapped the phylacteries in it, he may no longer use the cloth to hold money.


###### Sanhedrin 48b:4
[Sanhedrin 48b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/48b:4)

תָּא שְׁמַע: אָמַר לְאוּמָּן ״עֲשֵׂה לִי תִּיק שֶׁל סֵפֶר״ אוֹ ״נַרְתִּיק שֶׁל תְּפִילִּין״ – עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בָּהֶן קוֹדֶשׁ, מוּתָּר לְהִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בָּהֶן חוֹל. נִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בָּהֶן קוֹדֶשׁ – אָסוּר לְהִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בָּהֶן חוֹל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **Come** and **hear** another *baraita* that supports the opinion of Rava: If **one said to a craftsman: Fashion me a case [*tik*] for** a Torah **scroll, or:** Fashion for me **a bag [*nartik*] for phylacteries, as long as he has not** yet **used them** for **a sacred** purpose, it is **permitted** for him **to use them** for **a mundane** purpose. But if **he** already **used them** for **a sacred** purpose, it is **prohibited** for him **to use them** for **a mundane** purpose. This indicates that mere designation is nothing until the item is actually used for the purpose for which it had been designated.


###### Sanhedrin 48b:5
[Sanhedrin 48b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/48b:5)

תַּנָּאֵי הִיא, דְּתַנְיָא: צִיפָּן זָהָב אוֹ שֶׁטָּלָה עֲלֵיהֶן עוֹר שֶׁל בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה – פְּסוּלוֹת. עוֹר בְּהֵמָה טְהוֹרָה – כְּשֵׁירוֹת, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא עִיבְּדָן לִשְׁמָן. רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר: אַף עוֹר בְּהֵמָה טְהוֹרָה פְּסוּלוֹת, עַד שֶׁיְּעַבְּדוֹ לִשְׁמָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains: The matter of whether or not mere designation is significant **is** a dispute between ***tanna’im*. As it is taught** in a *baraita*: If one took phylacteries and **coated them with gold or patched them** with the **hide of a non-kosher animal, they are unfit.** But if one patched them with the **hide of a kosher animal** then **they are fit, and** this is so **even though he did not prepare them,** i.e., the hides, **for their sake,** i.e., for the sake of their use in a mitzva. **Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Even** if he patched them with the **hide of a kosher animal they are unfit,** and they remain unfit **until he prepares them for their sake.** Preparing the hide for the sake of the mitzva is analogous to designating it for that purpose. The first *tanna* and Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, who disagree as to whether the hide must be prepared for the sake of the mitzva, differ as to whether designation is significant.


###### Sanhedrin 48b:6
[Sanhedrin 48b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/48b:6)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רָבִינָא לְרָבָא: מִי אִיכָּא דּוּכְתָּא דְּרָמוּ בֵּיהּ מֵת, וְאָרְגִי בֶּגֶד לַמֵּת? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אִין, כְּגוֹן שָׁכְבֵי דְּהַרְפַּנְיָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
In connection with what was stated previously, that the *amora’im* disagree whether one is prohibited from deriving benefit from a garment woven for the sake of a dead person, **Ravina said to Rava: Is there** really such **a place where the deceased is** first **placed** on a bier **and** only afterward do they begin to **weave a garment for the deceased?** Rava **said to** Ravina: **Yes,** this is practiced on behalf of, **for example, the dead of Harpanya,** where the people are so poor that they cannot prepare shrouds for themselves during their lifetimes.


###### Sanhedrin 48b:7
[Sanhedrin 48b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/48b:7)

דְּרַשׁ מָרִימָר: הִלְכְתָא כְּוָותֵיהּ דְּאַבָּיֵי, וְרַבָּנַן אָמְרִי: הִלְכְתָא כְּוָותֵיהּ דְּרָבָא. וְהִלְכְתָא כְּוָותֵיהּ דְּרָבָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Mareimar taught** that the ***halakha*** is **in accordance with** the opinion **of Abaye** that mere designation is significant. **And the Rabbis say** that the ***halakha* is in accordance with** the opinion **of Rava** that mere designation is nothing. The Gemara concludes that the ***halakha*** is **in accordance with** the opinion **of Rava** that mere designation is nothing.


###### Sanhedrin 48b:8
[Sanhedrin 48b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/48b:8)

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: הֲרוּגֵי מַלְכוּת – נִכְסֵיהֶן לַמֶּלֶךְ, הֲרוּגֵי בֵּית דִּין – נִכְסֵיהֶן לַיּוֹרְשִׁין. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: אַף הֲרוּגֵי מַלְכוּת נִכְסֵיהֶן לַיּוֹרְשִׁין. אֲמַרוּ לֵיהּ לְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה: וַהֲלֹא כְּבָר נֶאֱמַר ״הִנֵּה בְּכֶרֶם נָבוֹת אֲשֶׁר יָרַד שָׁם לְרִשְׁתּוֹ״?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **The Sages taught** in a *baraita*: With regard to **those executed by** a Jewish **king** for crimes that they committed against him, **their property** belongs **to the king.** As for **those executed by the court** for a capital transgression, **their property** belongs **to** their **heirs. Rabbi Yehuda says: Even** with regard to **those executed by** a Jewish **king, their property** belongs **to** their **heirs.** The Rabbis **said to Rabbi Yehuda: But isn’t** it **already stated:** “Arise, go down to meet Ahab, king of Israel, who is in Samaria; **behold he is in the vineyard of Naboth, where he is gone down there to inherit it”** (I Kings 21:18)? The wording of the verse indicates that Ahab went down there by right, proving that the property of those executed by the king legally belongs to the king.


###### Sanhedrin 48b:9
[Sanhedrin 48b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/48b:9)

אָמַר לָהֶן: בֶּן אֲחִי אָבִיו הָיָה, וְרָאוּי לְיוֹרְשׁוֹ הָיָה. וַהֲלֹא הַרְבֵּה בָּנִים הָיוּ לוֹ? אָמַר לָהֶן: אוֹתוֹ וְאֶת בָּנָיו הָרַג, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״אִם לֹא אֶת דְּמֵי נָבוֹת וְאֶת דְּמֵי בָנָיו רָאִיתִי״. וְרַבָּנַן? הַהוּא בָּנִים הָרְאוּיִין לָצֵאת מִמֶּנּוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rabbi Yehuda **said to them:** Ahab **was** Naboth’s cousin, **the son of his paternal uncle, and** therefore **he was fit to inherit** from **him.** Accordingly, he took possession of the property in his capacity as an heir, and not as the king. They said to him: **But Naboth had many sons.** Why, then, did they not inherit from him? Rabbi Yehuda **said to them:** Ahab **executed** Naboth **and** also **his sons, as it is stated: “I have seen** yesterday **the blood of Naboth and the blood of his sons”** (II Kings 9:26). The Gemara asks: **And** how do **the Rabbis** counter this claim? The Gemara answers: In their opinion, **that** verse is referring to **the sons who would have issued from him** had Naboth not been executed. Ahab was held accountable for the blood of Naboth and for the blood of his unborn children.


###### Sanhedrin 48b:10
[Sanhedrin 48b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/48b:10)

בִּשְׁלָמָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר נִכְסֵיהֶן לַמֶּלֶךְ, הַיְינוּ דִּכְתִיב ״בֵּרַךְ נָבוֹת אֱלֹהִים וָמֶלֶךְ״. אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר נִכְסֵיהֶן לַיּוֹרְשִׁין, לְמָה לִי ״וָמֶלֶךְ״?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara raises a difficulty: **Granted, according to the one who says** that **the property of** those executed by the king belongs **to the king, that is** the reason **that it is written** that Jezebel arranged for witnesses to falsely testify that **“Naboth cursed God and the king”** (I Kings 21:13). Since Naboth cursed the king, Ahab could execute him and seize his property. **But according to the one who says** that **the property of** those executed by the king belongs **to** their **heirs, why do I** need the testimony that Naboth cursed the **king?** It would have sufficed for the witnesses to testify that he cursed God, in which case he would have been executed by the court, and Ahab would have taken possession of the vineyard as his heir.


###### Sanhedrin 48b:11
[Sanhedrin 48b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/48b:11)

וּלְטַעְמָיךְ, אֱלֹהִים לְמָה לִי? אֶלָּא לְאַפּוֹשֵׁי רִיתְחָא. הָכִי נָמֵי, לְאַפּוֹשֵׁי רִיתְחָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **And according to your reasoning,** that the witnesses testified that Naboth cursed the king so that Ahab could execute him and seize his property, **why do I** need the additional testimony that Naboth cursed **God? Rather,** you must say that the witnesses were instructed to testify that Naboth cursed both God and the king in order **to increase the anger** of the judges by accusing him of a second offense. **So too,** it can be argued that according to Rabbi Yehuda’s reasoning, the witnesses testified that Naboth also cursed the king in order **to increase the anger** of the judges. No proof can be brought from here that the property of those executed by the king belongs to the king.


###### Sanhedrin 48b:12
[Sanhedrin 48b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/48b:12)

בִּשְׁלָמָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר: ״נִכְסֵיהֶן לַמֶּלֶךְ״, הַיְינוּ דִּכְתִיב: ״וַיָּנׇס יוֹאָב אֶל אֹהֶל ה׳ וַיַּחֲזֵק בְּקַרְנוֹת הַמִּזְבֵּחַ״, וּכְתִיב: ״וַיֹּאמֶר לֹא אֵצֵא כִּי פֹּה אָמוּת״. אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר: ״נִכְסֵיהֶן לַיּוֹרְשִׁין״, מַאי נָפְקָא לֵיהּ מִינַּהּ? לְחַיֵּי שָׁעָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara raises another difficulty: **Granted, according to the one who says** that **the property of** those executed by the king belongs **to the king, that is** the reason **that it is written: “And Joab fled to the tent of the Lord and caught hold of the horns of the altar”** (I Kings 2:28), describing Joab’s actions after it became known that he supported Adonijah, **and** furthermore **it is written: “And he said, I will not leave, for here I will die”** (I Kings 2:30). Joab did not want to be put to death by the king because he did not want his property to pass into the king’s possession. **But according to the one who says** that **the property of** those executed by the king belongs **to** their **heirs, what difference** did taking refuge in the Sanctuary make **to him?** The Gemara answers: Joab fled to the sanctuary in order **to live a short while** longer. Consequently, there is no proof from here to either side of the dispute.


###### Sanhedrin 48b:13
[Sanhedrin 48b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/48b:13)

״וַיָּשֶׁב בְּנָיָהוּ אֶת הַמֶּלֶךְ דָּבָר לֵאמֹר כֹּה דִבֶּר יוֹאָב וְכֹה עָנָנִי״. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: זִיל אֵימָא לֵיהּ: תַּרְתֵּי לָא תַּעֲבֵיד בְּהַאי גַּבְרָא. אִי קָטְלַתְּ לֵיהּ, קַבֵּול לָטוּתֵיהּ דְּלַטְיֵיהּ אֲבוּךְ. וְאִי לָא, שִׁבְקֵיהּ דְּלֵיקוּ בְּלָטוּתֵיהּ דְּלַטְיֵיהּ אֲבוּךְ. ״וַיֹּאמֶר לוֹ הַמֶּלֶךְ עֲשֵׂה כַּאֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר וּפְגַע בּוֹ וּקְבַרְתּוֹ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara continues to discuss the incident involving Joab. After Joab took refuge in the Sanctuary and King Solomon sent Benaiah, son of Jehoiada, to fall upon him, Benaiah ordered Joab to leave the sanctuary, whereupon Joab refused. The verse then states: **“And Benaiah brought the king word back, saying: So said Joab, and so he answered me”** (I Kings 2:30). The Gemara explains: Joab **said to him: Go and say to** Solomon: **You cannot perform two** actions **to this man,** i.e., to me, Joab. **If you kill him,** i.e., me, **you** and your descendants **will receive the curses with which your father cursed me. And if** you do **not** wish to receive those curses, **let him go so that he may receive the curses with which your father cursed him.** And the next verse states: **“And the king said to him: Do as he has said, and fall upon him, and bury him.”** Solomon thereby accepted his father’s curses upon himself and his descendants.


###### Sanhedrin 48b:14
[Sanhedrin 48b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/48b:14)

אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב: כׇּל קְלָלוֹת שֶׁקִּילֵּל דָּוִד אֶת יוֹאָב נִתְקַיְּימוּ בְּזַרְעוֹ שֶׁל דָּוִד. ״אַל יִכָּרֵת מִבֵּית יוֹאָב זָב וּמְצֹרָע וּמַחֲזִיק בַּפֶּלֶךְ וְנֹפֵל בַּחֶרֶב וַחֲסַר לָחֶם״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Yehuda says** that **Rav says: All the curses with which David cursed Joab were** ultimately **fulfilled in David’s descendants,** due to the curse that Solomon accepted upon himself. David cursed Joab: **“Let the house of Joab never lack such as are afflicted with a discharge, or a leper, or that hold onto a staff, or fall by the sword, or lack bread”** (II Samuel 3:29).


###### Sanhedrin 48b:15
[Sanhedrin 48b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/48b:15)

״זָב״ – מֵרְחַבְעָם, דִּכְתִיב: ״וְהַמֶּלֶךְ רְחַבְעָם הִתְאַמֵּץ לַעֲלוֹת בַּמֶּרְכָּבָה לָנוּס יְרוּשָׁלִָים״, וּכְתִיב: ״וְכׇל הַמֶּרְכָּב אֲשֶׁר יִרְכַּב עָלָיו הַזָּב יִטְמָא״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara clarifies: The curse of being afflicted **“with a discharge,”** i.e., a *zav*, was fulfilled among Solomon’s descendants **in Rehoboam, as it is written: “And King Rehoboam made speed to get him up to his chariot [*bamerkava*] to flee to Jerusalem”** (I Kings 12:18), **and it is written: “And whatever saddle [*hamerkav*] he that has a discharge rides upon shall be unclean”** (Leviticus 15:9). The similarity between the words *merkava* and *merkav* indicates that Rehoboam was a *zav*.


###### Sanhedrin 48b:16
[Sanhedrin 48b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/48b:16)

״מְצוֹרָע״ – מֵעוּזִּיָּהוּ, דִּכְתִיב: ״וּבְחֶזְקָתוֹ גָּבַהּ לִבּוֹ עַד לְהַשְׁחִית וַיִּמְעַל בַּה׳ אֱלֹהָיו וַיָּבֹא אֶל הֵיכַל ה׳ לְהַקְטִיר עַל מִזְבַּח הַקְּטֹרֶת״, וּכְתִיב: ״וְהַצָּרַעַת זָרְחָה בְמִצְחוֹ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The curse of **“a leper”** was fulfilled among Solomon’s descendants **in Uzziah, as it is written: “But when he was strong, his heart was lifted up to his destruction; for he transgressed against the Lord his God, and went into the Temple of the Lord to burn incense upon the altar of incense”** (II Chronicles 26:16). **And it is** also **written: “And leprosy broke out on his forehead”** (II Chronicles 26:19).


###### Sanhedrin 48b:17
[Sanhedrin 48b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/48b:17)

״מַחֲזִיק בְּפֶלֶךְ״ – מֵאָסָא, דִּכְתִיב: ״רַק לְעֵת זִקְנָתוֹ חָלָה אֶת רַגְלָיו.״ וְאָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב: שֶׁאֲחָזוֹ פּוֹדַגְרָא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ מָר זוּטְרָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב נַחְמָן לְרַב נַחְמָן: הֵיכִי דָּמֵי? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: כְּמַחַט בִּבְשַׂר הַחַי. מְנָא יָדַע? אִי בָּעֵית אֵימָא: מֵיחַשׁ הֲוָה חָיֵישׁ בֵּיהּ. וְאִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא: מֵרַבֵּיהּ הֲוָה גְּמִיר לַהּ. וְאִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא: ״סוֹד ה׳ לִירֵאָיו וּבְרִיתוֹ לְהוֹדִיעָם״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The curse of those who **“hold onto a staff”** was fulfilled among Solomon’s descendants **in Asa, as it is written** concerning him: **“But in the time of his old age, he was diseased in his feet”** (I Kings 15:23). **And Rav Yehuda says** that **Rav says:** This means **that he was seized with gout [*podagra*]. Mar Zutra, son of Rav Naḥman, said to Rav Naḥman: What are the circumstances** and symptoms of this disease? Rav Naḥman **said to him:** The pain is **similar to** the pain of **a needle** piercing **live flesh.** The Gemara asks: **How did** Rav Naḥman **know** what gout is like? The Gemara answers: **If you wish, say** that he himself **suffered from** the disease. **And if you wish, say** that **he learned it** as a tradition **from his teacher. And if you wish, say** that he knew this through divine inspiration, as the verse states: **“The secret of the Lord is with them that fear Him; and He will show to them His covenant”** (Psalms 25:14).


###### Sanhedrin 48b:18
[Sanhedrin 48b:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/48b:18)

״נוֹפֵל בַּחֶרֶב״ – מִיֹּאשִׁיָּהוּ, דִּכְתִיב: ״וַיֹּרוּ הַמּוֹרִים לַמֶּלֶךְ יֹאשִׁיָּהוּ״. וְאָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב: שֶׁעָשׂוּ כׇּל גּוּפוֹ כִּכְבָרָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The curse of those who **“fall by the sword”** was fulfilled among Solomon’s descendants **in Josiah, as it is written: “And the archers shot at King Josiah”** (II Chronicles 35:23), **and Rav Yehuda says** that **Rav says:** They shot him with so many arrows **that they turned his whole body into a sieve.**


###### Sanhedrin 48b:19
[Sanhedrin 48b:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/48b:19)

״וַחֲסַר לֶחֶם״ – מִיכׇנְיָה, דִּכְתִיב: ״וַאֲרֻחָתוֹ אֲרֻחַת תָּמִיד נִתְּנָה לוֹ״. אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב: הַיְינוּ דְּאָמְרִי אִינָשֵׁי:

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The curse of those who **“lack bread”** was fulfilled among Solomon’s descendants **in Jeconiah, as it is written** concerning him: **“And as for his food allowance, there was a continual food allowance given him by the king,** a daily portion for every day, all the days of his life” (II Kings 25:30). **Rav Yehuda says** that **Rav says: This** explains the adage **that people say:**