## Sanhedrin Daf 55b

###### Sanhedrin 55b:1
[Sanhedrin 55b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/55b:1)

מִדְּסֵיפָא תַּקָּלָה וְקָלוֹן, רֵישָׁא תַּקָּלָה בְּלֹא קָלוֹן. וְהֵיכִי דָּמֵי? גּוֹי הַבָּא עַל הַבְּהֵמָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
evident **from** the fact **that the latter clause** of the mishna includes two reasons for the killing of the animal, namely both the **calamity and** the **shame** caused by the animal, that **the first clause,** the first reason stated in the mishna, is referring to a case of **a calamity without shame? And what are the circumstances** of a calamity without shame? It is the case of **a gentile who engages in intercourse with an animal.** In that case there is a calamity, as the gentile is executed, but his shame is not the concern of the Jewish court.


###### Sanhedrin 55b:2
[Sanhedrin 55b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/55b:2)

לָא, סֵיפָא תַּקָּלָה וְקָלוֹן. רֵישָׁא הָא קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן: דַּאֲפִילּוּ קָלוֹן בְּלֹא תַּקָּלָה נָמֵי מִחַיְּיבִי. וְהֵיכִי דָּמֵי? יִשְׂרָאֵל הַבָּא עַל הַבְּהֵמָה בְּשׁוֹגֵג, וְכִדְבָעֵי רַב הַמְנוּנָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this proof: **No. The latter clause** is referring to a case of both **a calamity and shame,** but **this first clause teaches us that even** in a case where there is a circumstance of **shame** alone **without** the **calamity** of execution, the court **is obligated** to kill the animal. Although the mishna employs the term: Calamity, it is possible that this is referring to the calamity of the transgression, not the execution of the transgressor. **And what are the circumstances** of this case? It is a case of **a Jew who unwittingly engages in intercourse with an animal, and** this is just **like** the case about **which Rav Hamnuna raises a dilemma.**


###### Sanhedrin 55b:3
[Sanhedrin 55b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/55b:3)

דְּבָעֵי רַב הַמְנוּנָא: יִשְׂרָאֵל הַבָּא עַל הַבְּהֵמָה בְּשׁוֹגֵג, מַהוּ? תַּקָּלָה וְקָלוֹן בָּעֵינַן, וְהָכָא קָלוֹן אִיכָּא, תַּקָּלָה לֵיכָּא? אוֹ דִילְמָא קָלוֹן, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין תַּקָּלָה?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**As Rav Hamnuna raises a dilemma:** With regard to **a Jew who unwittingly engages in intercourse with an animal, what is** the *halakha*? Is the animal stoned to death? **Do we need** both **a calamity and shame** in order to put it to death, **and** therefore **here** the animal is not killed, as **there is shame,** but **there is no calamity** of execution, **or perhaps shame** is enough, **even if there is no calamity?**


###### Sanhedrin 55b:4
[Sanhedrin 55b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/55b:4)

אָמַר רַב יוֹסֵף: תָּא שְׁמַע, בַּת שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד מִתְקַדֶּשֶׁת בְּבִיאָה, וְאִם בָּא עָלֶיהָ יָבָם קְנָאָהּ, וְחַיָּיבִין עָלֶיהָ מִשּׁוּם אֵשֶׁת אִישׁ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Yosef says: Come** and **hear** a resolution from a mishna (*Nidda* 44b): A girl who is **three years and one day old** whose father arranged her betrothal **is betrothed with intercourse,** as the legal status of intercourse with her is that of full-fledged intercourse. **And** in a case where the childless husband of a girl who is three years and one day old dies, **if** his brother, the ***yavam*, engages in intercourse with her, he acquires her** as his wife; **and** if she is married, a man other than her husband is **liable for** engaging in intercourse with **her due to** the prohibition of intercourse with **a married woman.**


###### Sanhedrin 55b:5
[Sanhedrin 55b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/55b:5)

וּמְטַמְּאָה אֶת בּוֹעֲלָהּ, לְטַמֵּא מִשְׁכָּב תַּחְתּוֹן כְּעֶלְיוֹן. נִיסֵּת לְכֹהֵן – אוֹכֶלֶת בִּתְרוּמָה. בָּא עָלֶיהָ אֶחָד מִן הַפְּסוּלִים – פְּסָלָהּ מִן הַכְּהוּנָּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna continues: **And** if she is impure due to menstruation, **she transmits impurity to one who engages in intercourse with her,** who then **renders** all the items designated for **lying beneath** him **impure like** the items designated for lying **above** him. If **she marries a priest, she may partake of *teruma*** like any other wife of a priest. If she is unmarried and **one** of the men **who are unfit** for the priesthood, e.g., a *mamzer* or *ḥalal*, **engages in intercourse with her, he has disqualified her from** marrying into **the priesthood,** and if she is the daughter of a priest, she is disqualified from partaking of *teruma*.


###### Sanhedrin 55b:6
[Sanhedrin 55b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/55b:6)

וְאִם בָּא עָלֶיהָ אֶחָד מִכׇּל הָעֲרָיוֹת הָאֲמוּרוֹת בְּתוֹרָה, מוּמָתִין עַל יָדָהּ, וְהִיא פְּטוּרָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna continues: **And if one of any of those with whom relations are forbidden, who are stated in the Torah, engaged in intercourse with her,** e.g., her father or father-in-law, **they are executed** by the court **for** engaging in intercourse with **her, and she is exempt** because she is a minor.


###### Sanhedrin 55b:7
[Sanhedrin 55b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/55b:7)

אֶחָד מִכׇּל עֲרָיוֹת, וַאֲפִילּוּ בְּהֵמָה. וְהָא הָכָא דְּקָלוֹן אִיכָּא, תַּקָּלָה לֵיכָּא, וְקָתָנֵי: מוּמָתִין עַל יָדָהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara infers: **One of any of those with whom relations are forbidden** apparently includes **even an animal. And here, there is shame** but **there is no calamity,** as she is not executed due to her status as a minor, **and** yet the mishna **teaches: They are executed for** engaging in intercourse with **her.** Evidently, the animal is killed.


###### Sanhedrin 55b:8
[Sanhedrin 55b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/55b:8)

כֵּיוָן דִּמְזִידָה הִיא, תַּקָּלָה נָמֵי אִיכָּא, וְרַחֲמָנָא הוּא דְּחָס עֲלַהּ. עֲלַהּ דִּידַהּ חָס, אַבְּהֵמָה לָא חָס.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this proof: **Since she** committed this transgression **intentionally, there is a calamity as well, and it is the Merciful One who has pity on her** due to her young age, and exempts her from punishment. And although the Merciful One **has pity on her, He does not have pity on the animal.** Therefore, it cannot be proven from here that shame without a calamity is sufficient cause for the animal to be put to death, because calamity is present in this case.


###### Sanhedrin 55b:9
[Sanhedrin 55b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/55b:9)

אָמַר רָבָא: תָּא שְׁמַע, בֶּן תֵּשַׁע שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד הַבָּא עַל יְבִמְתּוֹ – קְנָאָהּ, וְאֵינוֹ נוֹתֵן גֵּט עַד שֶׁיַּגְדִּיל. וּמְטַמֵּא כְּנִדָּה לְטַמֵּא מִשְׁכָּב תַּחְתּוֹן כְּעֶלְיוֹן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava says: Come** and **hear** a proof from the subsequent mishna (*Nidda* 45a): With regard to a boy who is **nine years and one day old,** whose brother died childless, and **who engaged in intercourse with his *yevama*,** his brother’s widow, the status of the intercourse is that of full-fledged intercourse and **he has acquired her** as his wife, **but** if he chooses to end the marriage, **he cannot give** her **a bill of divorce until he reaches majority. And he becomes ritually impure like a menstruating woman** after engaging in intercourse with her, and then **renders** all the items designated for **lying beneath** him **impure like** the items designated for lying **above** him.


###### Sanhedrin 55b:10
[Sanhedrin 55b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/55b:10)

פּוֹסֵל וְאֵינוֹ מַאֲכִיל, וּפוֹסֵל אֶת הַבְּהֵמָה מֵעַל גַּבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ, וְנִסְקֶלֶת עַל יָדוֹ. וְאִם בָּא עַל אַחַת מִכׇּל הָעֲרָיוֹת הָאֲמוּרוֹת בְּתוֹרָה, מוּמָתִים עַל יָדוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna continues: If he is disqualified from the priesthood and engages in intercourse with the daughter of a priest, **he disqualifies** her from partaking of *teruma*; **but** if he is a priest who marries an Israelite woman, **he does not enable** her **to partake** of *teruma*. **And** if he engages in intercourse with an animal, **he disqualifies the animal from** being sacrificed **upon the altar, and** the animal **is stoned on** the basis of intercourse with **him. And if he engaged in intercourse with one of any of those with whom relations are forbidden, who are stated in the Torah, they are executed** by the court **on** the basis of intercourse with **him,** but he is exempt.


###### Sanhedrin 55b:11
[Sanhedrin 55b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/55b:11)

וְהָא הָכָא קָלוֹן אִיכָּא, תַּקָּלָה לֵיכָּא, וְקָתָנֵי: נִסְקֶלֶת עַל יָדוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara infers: **And here,** in a case where he engages in intercourse with an animal, **there is shame,** but **there is no calamity, and** yet the mishna **teaches** that the animal **is stoned on** the basis of intercourse with **him,** indicating that shame is sufficient for the animal to be killed.


###### Sanhedrin 55b:12
[Sanhedrin 55b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/55b:12)

כֵּיוָן דְּמֵזִיד הוּא, תַּקָּלָה נָמֵי אִיכָּא, וְרַחֲמָנָא הוּא דְּחָס עִילָּוֵיהּ. עֲלֵיהּ דִּידֵיהּ חָס רַחֲמָנָא, אַבְּהֵמָה לָא חָס רַחֲמָנָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this proof: **Since he** committed this transgression **intentionally, there is a calamity as well, and it is the Merciful One who has pity on him** due to his minority. Although **the Merciful One has pity on him, the Merciful One does not have pity on the animal.** Therefore, it cannot be proven from here that shame without a calamity is sufficient cause for the animal to be put to death, because calamity is present in this case.


###### Sanhedrin 55b:13
[Sanhedrin 55b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/55b:13)

תָּא שְׁמַע: דָּבָר אַחֵר, שֶׁלֹּא תְּהֵא בְּהֵמָה עוֹבֶרֶת בַּשּׁוּק וְיֹאמְרוּ: ״זוֹ הִיא שֶׁנִּסְקַל פְּלוֹנִי עַל יָדָהּ״. מַאי לָאו, מִדְּסֵיפָא תַּקָּלָה וְקָלוֹן, רֵישָׁא קָלוֹן בְּלֹא תַּקָּלָה? וְהֵיכִי דָּמֵי? יִשְׂרָאֵל הַבָּא עַל הַבְּהֵמָה בְּשׁוֹגֵג.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **Come** and **hear** a resolution from the mishna (54a): **Alternatively,** it is **so that** this **animal will not pass through the marketplace, and** those who see it **will say: This is** the animal **because of which so-and-so was stoned. What, is it not** evident **from** the fact **that the latter clause** of the mishna includes two reasons for the killing of the animal, namely both the **calamity and** the **shame** caused by the animal, that **the first clause,** the first reason stated in the mishna, is referring to a case of **shame without a calamity? And what are the circumstances** of shame without a calamity? It is the case of **a Jew who unwittingly engages in intercourse with an animal.**


###### Sanhedrin 55b:14
[Sanhedrin 55b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/55b:14)

לָא, סֵיפָא תַּקָּלָה וְקָלוֹן, רֵישָׁא תַּקָּלָה בְּלֹא קָלוֹן. וְהֵיכִי דָּמֵי? גּוֹי הַבָּא עַל הַבְּהֵמָה, וּכְדִבְעוֹ מִינֵּיהּ מֵרַב שֵׁשֶׁת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this proof: **No,** perhaps **the latter clause** is referring to a case where there is both **a calamity and shame,** while **the first clause** is referring to a case where there is **a calamity without shame. And what are the circumstances** of a calamity without shame? It is the case of **a gentile who engages in intercourse with an animal, as** the students **asked Rav Sheshet.** The dilemma is left unresolved. No conclusive answer can be inferred from the mishna for either this dilemma or for the dilemma raised by the students of Rav Sheshet.


###### Sanhedrin 55b:15
[Sanhedrin 55b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/55b:15)

**מַתְנִי׳** הַמְגַדֵּף אֵינוֹ חַיָּיב עַד שֶׁיְּפָרֵשׁ הַשֵּׁם. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן קׇרְחָה:

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** **One who blasphemes,** i.e., one who curses God, **is not liable unless he utters the name** of God and curses it. **Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa said:**