## Sanhedrin Daf 63a

###### Sanhedrin 63a:1
[Sanhedrin 63a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/63a:1)

אָמַר רַבִּי אַמֵּי: זִיבַּח וְקִיטֵּר וְנִיסֵּךְ בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד, אֵינוֹ חַיָּיב אֶלָּא אַחַת. אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: מַאי טַעְמָא דְּרַבִּי אַמֵּי? אָמַר קְרָא ״לֹא תָעׇבְדֵם״, הַכָּתוּב עֲשָׂאָן כּוּלָּן עֲבוֹדָה אַחַת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Ami says:** If one **sacrificed** an animal as an idolatrous offering **and burned** incense **and poured a libation,** all **in** the course of **one lapse of awareness, he is obligated** to bring **only one** sin-offering. **Abaye says: What is the reason for** the opinion of **Rabbi Ami? The verse states: “Nor worship them”** (Exodus 20:5). **The verse renders all** the various rites of worship as **one rite.**


###### Sanhedrin 63a:2
[Sanhedrin 63a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/63a:2)

וּמִי אָמַר אַבָּיֵי הָכִי? וְהָאָמַר אַבָּיֵי: שָׁלֹשׁ הִשְׁתַּחֲוָאוֹת בַּעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה לָמָּה?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And does Abaye** actually **say this? But doesn’t Abaye say: Why** are there **three** mentions in the Torah of the prohibition against **bowing to** an object of **idol worship?** The prohibition against bowing to an idol appears three times: “You shall not bow to them nor worship them” (Exodus 20:5), “You shall not bow to their gods nor worship them” (Exodus 23:24), and “For you shall bow to no other god” (Exodus 34:14).


###### Sanhedrin 63a:3
[Sanhedrin 63a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/63a:3)

אַחַת לִכְדַרְכָּהּ, וְאַחַת שֶׁלֹּא כְּדַרְכָּהּ, וְאַחַת לְחַלֵּק.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The reason is that **one** mention is **for** an idol for which bowing is **its** standard **manner** of worship, **and one** mention is a prohibition against bowing to an idol even if bowing is **not its** standard **manner** of worship, **and one** mention is **to divide** idol worship into categories, as one is obligated to bring an offering for every type of worship that he performed. Evidently, Abaye’s opinion is not in accordance with Rabbi Ami’s statement that one is obligated to bring one sin-offering for all of his acts of idol worship.


###### Sanhedrin 63a:4
[Sanhedrin 63a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/63a:4)

לִדְבָרָיו דְּרַבִּי אַמֵּי קָאָמַר, וְלֵיהּ לָא סְבִירָא לֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: Abaye **stated** his reason **in accordance with the statement of Rabbi Ami, but** he **himself does not hold accordingly.**


###### Sanhedrin 63a:5
[Sanhedrin 63a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/63a:5)

גּוּפָא, אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: שָׁלֹשׁ הִשְׁתַּחֲוָאוֹת בַּעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה לָמָּה? אַחַת לִכְדַרְכָּהּ, וְאַחַת שֶׁלֹּא כְּדַרְכָּהּ, וְאַחַת לְחַלֵּק.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara discusses **the** matter **itself** that **Abaye says: Why** are there **three** mentions of the prohibition against **bowing to** an object of **idol worship? One** is **for** an idol for which bowing is **its** standard **manner** of worship, **and one** is a prohibition against bowing to an idol even if bowing is **not its** standard **manner** of worship, **and one** mention is **to divide** idol worship into categories.


###### Sanhedrin 63a:6
[Sanhedrin 63a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/63a:6)

לִכְדַרְכָּהּ, מֵ״אֵיכָה יַעַבְדוּ הַגּוֹיִם הָאֵלֶּה״ נָפְקָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: Why is a verse necessary **for** the prohibition against bowing to an idol for which bowing is **its** standard **manner** of worship? That prohibition **is** already **derived from** the verse: “Take heed to yourself that you not be ensnared to follow them…saying, **how do these nations serve** their gods, so I will do likewise” (Deuteronomy 12:30), which indicates that one is liable for worshipping an idol in the manner that the gentiles worship it.


###### Sanhedrin 63a:7
[Sanhedrin 63a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/63a:7)

אֶלָּא, אַחַת כְּדַרְכָּהּ וְשֶׁלֹּא כְּדַרְכָּהּ, וְאַחַת לְשֶׁלֹּא כְּדַרְכָּהּ, וְאַחַת לְחַלֵּק.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** Abaye’s statement should be understood as follows: **One** mention of the prohibition is **for** an idol for which **its** typical **manner** of worship is similar to bowing in that the idol is worshipped in an honorable manner, **but** bowing is **not its** typical **manner** of worship, as it is not typically worshipped by bowing. **And one** mention is a prohibition against bowing to an idol even if it is **not** similar to **its** standard **manner** of worship at all. **And one** mention is **to divide** idol worship into categories.


###### Sanhedrin 63a:8
[Sanhedrin 63a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/63a:8)

הַמְקַבְּלוֹ עָלָיו בֶּאֱלוֹהַּ, הָאוֹמֵר לוֹ ״אֵלִי אַתָּה״. אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר אֲבוּהּ אָמַר רַב: כֵּיוָן שֶׁאָמַר לוֹ ״אֵלִי אַתָּה״ – חַיָּיב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna includes among those liable for idol worship **one who** declares that he **accepts** an idol **upon himself as a god** and **one who says to** an idol: **You are my god. Rav Naḥman says** that **Rabba bar Avuh says** that **Rav says: Once** a person **said to** an idol: **You are my god,** he is **liable** even if he did not worship it.


###### Sanhedrin 63a:9
[Sanhedrin 63a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/63a:9)

לְמַאי? אִי לִקְטָלָא, מַתְנִיתִין הִיא! אֶלָּא לְקׇרְבָּן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: The transgressor is liable **to** receive **what** punishment? **If** he is liable **to** receive the **death** penalty, Rav’s statement is superfluous, as this **is** stated in **the mishna. Rather,** Rav means that one who does so unwittingly is obligated **to** bring **an offering.**


###### Sanhedrin 63a:10
[Sanhedrin 63a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/63a:10)

וַאֲפִילּוּ לְרַבָּנַן? וְהָתַנְיָא: אֵינוֹ חַיָּיב אֶלָּא עַל דָּבָר שֶׁיֵּשׁ בּוֹ מַעֲשֶׂה, כְּגוֹן זִיבּוּחַ וְקִיטּוּר וְנִיסּוּךְ וְהִשְׁתַּחֲוָאָה. וְאָמַר רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ: מַאן תְּנָא הִשְׁתַּחֲוָאָה? רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא הִיא, דְּאָמַר לָא בָּעֵינַן מַעֲשֶׂה. מִכְּלָל דְּרַבָּנַן סָבְרִי בָּעֵינַן מַעֲשֶׂה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And** is this statement true **even according to** the opinion of **the Rabbis? But isn’t it taught** in a *baraita*: One **is obligated** to bring a sin-offering for unwitting idol worship **only for a matter,** a transgression, **that involves an action, e.g., sacrificing** an offering, **or burning** incense, **or pouring** a libation, **or bowing? And Reish Lakish says: Who** is the *tanna* who **taught bowing** among these examples? **It is Rabbi Akiva, who says** that **we do not require** a significant **action** in order to render one liable to bring a sin-offering; a minimal action is sufficient. **By inference, the Rabbis,** who disagree with Rabbi Akiva, **maintain** that **we require** a significant **action.** If bowing is not considered a significant action, then all the more so speech alone is not considered a significant action.


###### Sanhedrin 63a:11
[Sanhedrin 63a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/63a:11)

כִּי קָאָמַר רַב נָמֵי, לְרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא קָאָמַר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **Rav, too, when he states** that one who says to an idol: You are my god, is obligated to bring a sin-offering, **he states** this **according to** the opinion of **Rabbi Akiva.**


###### Sanhedrin 63a:12
[Sanhedrin 63a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/63a:12)

לְרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, פְּשִׁיטָא! הַיְינוּ מְגַדֵּף.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: If Rav states this **according to** the opinion of **Rabbi Akiva,** isn’t it **obvious** that the transgressor is obligated to bring a sin-offering? **This is** identical to the *halakha* of **a blasphemer,** whom Rabbi Akiva obligates to bring an offering despite the lack of an action.


###### Sanhedrin 63a:13
[Sanhedrin 63a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/63a:13)

מַהוּ דְּתֵימָא: עַד כָּאן לָא מְחַיֵּיב רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא קׇרְבָּן אֶלָּא בִּמְגַדֵּף, דִּכְתִיב בֵּיהּ כָּרֵת. אֲבָל הָכָא, דְּלָא כְּתִיב בֵּיהּ כָּרֵת, אֵימָא לָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: Rav states this **lest you say** that **Rabbi Akiva obligates** one to bring **an offering** for a transgression that does not involve an action **only in** the case of **a blasphemer, as it is written** explicitly **with regard to** a blasphemer that he receives ***karet*** in the verse: “He blasphemes the Lord, and that soul shall be excised [*nikhreta*] from among his people” (Numbers 15:30). **But here,** with regard to one who accepts an idol as his god, **where *karet* is not written** explicitly, one might **say** that he is **not** obligated to bring an offering.


###### Sanhedrin 63a:14
[Sanhedrin 63a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/63a:14)

קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן דְּאִתַּקּוֹשֵׁי אִתַּקּוּשׁ, דִּכְתִיב: ״וַיִּשְׁתַּחֲווּ לוֹ וַיִּזְבְּחוּ לוֹ וַיֹּאמְרוּ וְגוֹ׳״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Therefore, Rav **teaches us that** he is obligated to bring an offering, as the Torah **compares** the acceptance of an idol as a god to a case of active idol worship; **as it is written:** “They have made themselves a molten calf, **and have bowed to it, and have sacrificed to it, and said:** These are your gods, Israel, which brought you up out of the land of Egypt” (Exodus 32:8).


###### Sanhedrin 63a:15
[Sanhedrin 63a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/63a:15)

אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: אִלְמָלֵא וָיו שֶׁבְּ״הֶעֱלוּךָ״, נִתְחַיְּיבוּ שׂוֹנְאֵיהֶם שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל כְּלָיָיה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
With regard to the aforementioned verse, **Rabbi Yoḥanan says: Were it not for the *vav* in** the term: **“Which brought you up [*he’elukha*],”** giving it a plural form, **the haters of the Jewish people,** a euphemism used to refer to the Jewish people themselves, **would have been sentenced to destruction** for their idol worship. Since they recognized that God had taken them out of Egypt, and thought that He had merely made the golden calf His partner, the Jewish people were spared.


###### Sanhedrin 63a:16
[Sanhedrin 63a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/63a:16)

כְּתַנָּאֵי: אֲחֵרִים אוֹמְרִים, אִלְמָלֵא וָיו שֶׁבְּ״הֶעֱלוּךָ״, נִתְחַיְּיבוּ שׂוֹנְאֵיהֶם שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל כְּלָיָיה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara comments: Rabbi Yoḥanan’s opinion is **like** one side of the following dispute between ***tanna’im*: Others say: Were it not for the *vav* in** the term: **“Which brought you up [*he’elukha*],” the haters of the Jewish people would have been sentenced to destruction.**


###### Sanhedrin 63a:17
[Sanhedrin 63a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/63a:17)

אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַאי: וַהֲלֹא כׇּל הַמְשַׁתֵּף שֵׁם שָׁמַיִם וְדָבָר אַחֵר נֶעֱקָר מִן הָעוֹלָם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר ״בִּלְתִּי לַה׳ לְבַדּוֹ״! אֶלָּא מָה תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״אֲשֶׁר הֶעֱלוּךָ״? שֶׁאִיוּוּ אֱלוֹהוֹת הַרְבֵּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai said to him: But isn’t anyone who links the name of Heaven and something else,** a euphemism for an idol, **uprooted from the world? As it is stated:** “He who sacrifices to the gods, **save to the Lord only,** shall be utterly destroyed” (Exodus 22:19). The fact that the Jewish people included God in their idolatrous statement could not have saved them from destruction. **Rather, what** is the meaning when **the verse states: “Which brought you up”** in the plural? The verse teaches **that** the Jewish people **desired many gods;** they were not satisfied with the golden calf alone.


###### Sanhedrin 63a:18
[Sanhedrin 63a:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/63a:18)

אֲבָל הַמְגַפֵּף וְהַמְנַשֵּׁק, הַמְכַבֵּד וְהַמְרַבֵּץ כּוּ׳. כִּי אֲתָא רַב דִּימִי, אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: עַל כּוּלָּם לוֹקֶה, חוּץ מֵהַנּוֹדֵר בִּשְׁמוֹ וְהַמְקַיֵּים בִּשְׁמוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: **But** with regard to **one who hugs** an idol, **or one who kisses** it, **or one who cleans** it, **or one who sprays** water before it, he transgresses a prohibition but is not liable to receive capital punishment. **When Rav Dimi came** from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said that **Rabbi Elazar says: For all of** these actions one **is flogged, with the exception** of the cases stated later in the mishna **of one who vows in** an idol’s **name and one who affirms** his statement by an oath **in its name.**


###### Sanhedrin 63a:19
[Sanhedrin 63a:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/63a:19)

מַאי שְׁנָא הַנּוֹדֵר בִּשְׁמוֹ וְהַמְקַיֵּים בִּשְׁמוֹ דְּלָא לָקֵי? מִשּׁוּם דְּהָוֵה לֵיהּ לָאו שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ מַעֲשֶׂה. הָנֵי נָמֵי לָאו שֶׁבִּכְלָלוֹת הוּא, וְאֵין לוֹקִין עַל לָאו שֶׁבִּכְלָלוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What is different** about these cases, **one who vows in** an idol’s **name and one who affirms** his statement by an oath **in its name, that** the transgressors **are not flogged?** It is **because they are** each an example of **a prohibition that does not involve an action. These** actions **too,** namely, hugging or kissing an idol and the like, are not punishable by lashes; one who performs them violates **a general prohibition, and one is not flogged for** violating **a general prohibition,** i.e., one that contains several prohibitions.


###### Sanhedrin 63a:20
[Sanhedrin 63a:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/63a:20)

דְּתַנְיָא: מִנַּיִן לְאוֹכֵל מִן הַבְּהֵמָה קוֹדֶם שֶׁתֵּצֵא נַפְשָׁהּ שֶׁהוּא בְּלֹא תַעֲשֶׂה? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״לֹא תֹאכְלוּ עַל הַדָּם״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**As** this principle **is taught** in a *baraita*: **From where** is it derived **that one who eats from an animal before its soul departs is** in transgression **of a prohibition? The verse states: “You shall not eat with the blood”** (Leviticus 19:26), meaning, you shall not eat from the animal while its soul, which is referred to in the Torah as blood, is still within it.


###### Sanhedrin 63a:21
[Sanhedrin 63a:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/63a:21)

דָּבָר אַחֵר: ״לֹא תֹאכְלוּ עַל הַדָּם״ – לֹא תֹּאכְלוּ בָּשָׂר, וַעֲדַיִן דָּם בְּמִזְרָק.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* adds: **Another matter** is derived from the verse **“You shall not eat with the blood”: You shall not eat** the **meat** of an offering **while** its **blood is still in the bowl,** as it has not yet been sprinkled on the altar. The meat of an offering may be eaten by the priests only after its blood is sprinkled.


###### Sanhedrin 63a:22
[Sanhedrin 63a:22](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/63a:22)

רַבִּי דּוֹסָא אוֹמֵר: מִנַּיִין שֶׁאֵין מַבְרִין עַל הֲרוּגֵי בֵּית דִּין? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״לֹא תֹאכְלוּ עַל הַדָּם״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues: **Rabbi Dosa says: From where** is it derived **that** although in general, after a deceased person is buried, the mourners are provided by others with a meal, others **do not provide** the mourners **with a meal** after the burial **of those executed by the court? The verse states: “You shall not eat with the blood,”** which is interpreted to mean: You shall not eat a mourners’ meal after the burial of one who was executed.


###### Sanhedrin 63a:23
[Sanhedrin 63a:23](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/63a:23)

רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר: מִנַּיִן לְסַנְהֶדְרִין שֶׁהָרְגוּ אֶת הַנֶּפֶשׁ, שֶׁאֵין טוֹעֲמִין כְּלוּם כׇּל אוֹתוֹ הַיּוֹם? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״לֹא תֹאכְלוּ עַל הַדָּם״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Akiva says: From where** is it derived with regard **to a Sanhedrin that killed a soul,** i.e., that sentenced a person to death, **that** the judges **may not taste anything that entire day** that they sentenced him? **The verse states: “You shall not eat with the blood.”**


###### Sanhedrin 63a:24
[Sanhedrin 63a:24](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/63a:24)

אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: אַזְהָרָה לְבֵן סוֹרֵר וּמוֹרֶה מִנַּיִן? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״לֹא תֹאכְלוּ עַל הַדָּם״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Yoḥanan says: From where is** the **prohibition against** the behavior of **a stubborn and rebellious son** derived? While the Torah states the punishment given to a stubborn and rebellious son, the prohibition against his actions, namely, stealing money from his parents in order to eat a gluttonous meal of meat and wine in the company of lowly men, is not explicit. **The verse states: “You shall not eat with the blood,”** which is interpreted to mean that one may not eat in a manner that is punishable by death. This concludes the *baraita*.


###### Sanhedrin 63a:25
[Sanhedrin 63a:25](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/63a:25)

וְאָמַר רַבִּי אָבִין בַּר חִיָּיא, וְאִיתֵּימָא רַבִּי אָבִין בַּר כָּהֲנָא: עַל כּוּלָּם אֵינוֹ לוֹקֶה, מִשּׁוּם דְּהָוֵה לֵיהּ לָאו שֶׁבִּכְלָלוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Rabbi Avin bar Ḥiyya says, and some say** it is **Rabbi Avin bar Kahana** who says this: **For all of** the prohibitions that the Sages derive from this verse, one **is not flogged** for transgressing them, **as it is a general prohibition** that is referring to several different actions. Therefore, since the prohibition against hugging or kissing an idol is also derived from a general prohibition, it should not be punishable by lashes, contrary to the opinion of Rav Dimi.


###### Sanhedrin 63a:26
[Sanhedrin 63a:26](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/63a:26)

אֶלָּא, כִּי אֲתָא רָבִין אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: עַל כּוּלָּן אֵינוֹ לוֹקֶה, חוּץ מִן הַנּוֹדֵר בִּשְׁמוֹ וְהַמְקַיֵּים בִּשְׁמוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, when Ravin came** from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he related a different version of what **Rabbi Elazar says: For all of** the transgressions listed in the mishna one **is not flogged, with the exception of one who vows in** an idol’s **name and one who affirms** his statement by an oath **in its name.**


###### Sanhedrin 63a:27
[Sanhedrin 63a:27](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/63a:27)

מַאי שְׁנָא אַהָנָךְ דְּלָא לָקֵי? דְּהָוֵה לֵיהּ לָאו שֶׁבִּכְלָלוֹת. הָנֵי נָמֵי לָאו שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ מַעֲשֶׂה נִינְהוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What is different about** transgressing **those** prohibitions for **which one is not flogged?** It is **that they are** each an example of **a general prohibition,** as explained previously. **These** cases **too,** namely, one who vows or takes an oath in the name of an idol, **are** included in **a prohibition that does not involve an action,** and therefore the transgressors are not punishable by lashes.


###### Sanhedrin 63a:28
[Sanhedrin 63a:28](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/63a:28)

הָהוּא כְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה, דְּאָמַר: לָאו שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ מַעֲשֶׂה – לוֹקִין עָלָיו.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **That** *halakha* of Rabbi Eliezer’s is **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yehuda, who says** with regard to **a prohibition that does not involve an action** that **one is flogged for** violating **it.**


###### Sanhedrin 63a:29
[Sanhedrin 63a:29](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/63a:29)

דְּתַנְיָא: ״לֹא תוֹתִירוּ מִמֶּנּוּ עַד בֹּקֶר״ – בָּא הַכָּתוּב לִיתֵּן עֲשֵׂה אַחַר לֹא תַעֲשֶׂה,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**As it is taught** in a *baraita* with regard to the Paschal offering: The verse states: **“And you shall not leave any of it until morning;** but that which remains of it until morning you shall burn with fire” (Exodus 12:10). **The verse comes to provide a positive** mitzva to burn the leftover meat **after the prohibition** against leaving it over was violated,