MISHNAH: But the following are strangled¹: One who hits his father or his mother². 21:15., and one who kidnaps a person from Israel³ 21:16, Deut. 24:7., and the Elder who rebels against the Court⁴ 17:12., and the false prophet⁵ 18:20–22., and one who prophesies in the name of foreign worship⁶ 13:6., and one who copulates with a married woman⁷ 22:22. This also applies to the woman., and the perjured witness of a Cohen’s daughter and her paramour⁸. One who hits his father or his mother is not punishable unless he inflict a wound on them. The following is more aggravating about one who curses¹⁵ than one who hits, in that one who curses is punishable even after death, but one who hits after death cannot be prosecuted.

footnotes: ¹ Since no particular form of execution is prescribed for them. ² Ex ³ In order to sell him or her as a slave, Ex. ⁴ The Supreme Court sitting in the Temple court. Deut. ⁵ Deut. ⁶ Deut. ⁷ Deut. ⁸ Even though the adulterous daughter of a Cohen is burned, there is no verse to apply the same punishment to the adulterer. Since witnesses to adultery are witnesses simultaneously to both parties, they cannot be punished more than the adulterer would be. ¹⁵ Father or Mother; Mishnah 7:14.

HALAKHAH: But the following are strangled,” etc. From where warning⁹ for one who hits his father or his mother? Forty times he shall hit him, he may not add¹⁰. 25:3, speaking of punishment decreed by the court.. Since one who is commanded to hit is commanded not to hit, one who is commanded not to hit a fortiori is commanded not to hit¹¹ Mišpatim 5 (ed. Horovitz-Rabin p. 266). The argument establishes a guide for ethical behavior; it is not one in criminal law for which only explicit verses may form the basis..

footnotes: ⁹ Cf. Chapter 7, Note 129. ¹⁰ Deut ¹¹ It is sinful to hit anybody one is not commanded to hit. But only hitting a parent may be a captial crime. Mekhilta dR. Ismael

“He is not punishable unless he inflict a wound on them¹².” What kind of wound? A wound for the laws of the Sabbath, a wound for the law of torts? If you say, as a wound for the laws of the Sabbath, even if he did not cause them to miss anything¹³ 14:1.; if you say, as a wound for the laws of torts, only if he caused them to miss something¹⁴ 8:1, Notes 15–17..

footnotes: ¹² Mishnah 2. ¹³ It is a desecration of the Sabbath to cause a contusion. Mishnah Šabbat ¹⁴ Some particle of skin or blood. Cf. Bava qamma

MISHNAH: And one who kidnaps a person from Israel is not punishable unless he bring him into his property¹⁶. Rebbi Jehudah says, unless he bring him into his property and use him, as it is said, and enslaved him or sold him. One who kidnaps his own son, Rebbi Joḥanan ben Beroqa¹⁷ not R. Joḥanan ben Beroqa. declares punishable but the Sages make him not prosecutable. One who kidnapped a person half slave and half free Rebbi Joḥanan ben Beroqa declares punishable but the Sages make him not prosecutable.

footnotes: ¹⁶ Or sells him as a slave. ¹⁷ The Babylonian attributions in the last two cases are different. The Halakhah shows that in the last sentence also here one has to read R. Jehudah,

HALAKHAH: ¹⁸ From where a first warning about stealing: you shall not steal. From where a second warning about stealing: you shall not steal. You shall not steal, in order to aggravate; you shall not steal, in order to pay double restitution, in order to pay quadruple or quintuple restitution. Ben Bagbag says, do not steal your own property back from the thief, lest you be seen stealing.

footnotes: ¹⁸ The entire paragraph is from Halakhah 8:3, Notes 38-43.

Rebbi Abba, Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Hoshaia: he is punishable only if he steals money. Rebbi Zeˋira in the name of Rebbi Hoshaia: he is punishable only if he shows contempt for money. What means showing contempt for money? Where do we hold? If about him who says, here you have five and give me for three, he is an idiot. Here you have three and give me for five, he is a regular person. But we deal with one who says, here you have five and give me for five.

What is a thief and what is a robber? Rebbi Hila said, if he stole in the presence of witnesses, he is a thief, in the presence of the owners he is a robber. Rebbi Zeˋira asked: but if he intended to rob (for copulation)¹⁸, he is not a robber. What is a robber according to Rebbi Zeˋira? Rebbi Samuel ben Sosarta in the name of Rebbi Abbahu: only if he rob in the presence of ten people. The prototype for all these: He robbed the spear from the hand of the Egyptian, etc.

footnotes: ¹⁸ A copyist’s error who wrote לבעילה “for sexual intercourse” instead of לבעליה “in front of its owners” as in Halakhah 8:3.

What is the reason of Rebbi Joḥanan ben Beroqa? Of the Children of Israel. What is the reason of the rabbis? Of his brothers, not his sons²⁰ 24:7 reads: If a man be found kidnapping one of his brothers, of the Children of Israel, and enslaves him or sells him, the kidnapper shall die; you shall eliminate evil from Israel. This paragraph speaks of the son, the next (cf. Note 17) of the half-emancipated slave. Sifry Deut. 273 parallels the first paragraph but in the case of the semi-emancipated slave treats the rabbis’ as unanimous opinion. The Babli 86a finds a reason to exclude the semi-emancipated slave from the partitive mem in the verse of the Children of Israel, which implies “not all of the Children of Israel.”. What is the reason of Rebbi Jehudah? Of his brothers, even partially his brother. What is the reason of the rabbis? Of his brothers, unless he be totally his brother.

footnotes: ²⁰ Deut.

MISHNAH: The Elder who rebels against the Court, as it is said: If a law case is too difficult for you, whether blood and blood, or case and case, etc. Three courts were there, one at the entrance of the Temple Mount, one at the entrance of the Temple courtyard, and one in the ashlar hall. They come to the one at the entrance to the Temple Mount and he says, so I argued and so my colleagues argued, so I taught and so my colleague taught. If they had heard it, they tell them; otherwise they come to the one at the entrance of the Temple courtyard and he says, so I argued and so my colleagues argued, so I taught and so my colleagues taught. If they had heard it, they tell them; otherwise these and those come to the Supreme Court in the ashlar hall, for from there instruction goes out to all of Israel as it is said, from that place which the Eternal will choose. If he returned to his town²⁵, repeated and taught as was his custom, he cannot be prosecuted. If he instructed to act, he is punishable, as it is said⁴ 17:12., but the man who would act criminally etc. He is not punishable unless he instruct to act. A student who instructed to act cannot be prosecuted; it turns out that his severity is his leniency²⁶.

footnotes: ²⁵ The representative of the lower court who had been told by the Supreme Court that his opinion was wrong. ⁴ The Supreme Court sitting in the Temple court. Deut. ²⁶ A person unqualified to judge who nevertheless judges commits a grievous sin, worse than the qualified judge who does not obey the rulings of the Supreme Court. But his punishment is reserved for Heaven, not the human court.

HALAKHAH: “The Elder who rebels,” etc. Halakhah 4: “If he returned to his town, repeated and taught as was his custom,” etc. ²⁷ exists in two other versions, Babli 87a and Sifry Deut. 152. It is the subject of a study by E. A. Finkelstein, HUCA XXXII (1961) א-כה. It is written²⁰ 24:7 reads: If a man be found kidnapping one of his brothers, of the Children of Israel, and enslaves him or sells him, the kidnapper shall die; you shall eliminate evil from Israel. This paragraph speaks of the son, the next (cf. Note 17) of the half-emancipated slave. Sifry Deut. 273 parallels the first paragraph but in the case of the semi-emancipated slave treats the rabbis’ as unanimous opinion. The Babli 86a finds a reason to exclude the semi-emancipated slave from the partitive mem in the verse of the Children of Israel, which implies “not all of the Children of Israel.”: If something is being distinguished for you in law, this shows that the verse speaks about the distinguished member of the court²⁸. For you, this is counsel. Something is sermonizing²⁹ could be unless one subscribes to Maimonides’s opinion that all interpretations of biblical verses by the hermeneutical rules are rabbinic in character, i. e., aggadic.. Whether blood and blood, whether menstrual blood or blood of virginity; whether menstrual blood, blood of flux, or blood of skin disease³⁰. Whether case or case, between those who are stoned, or burned, or decapitated, or strangled³¹. Whether defect or defect, between a quarantined sufferer from skin disease or an absolute one¹³²; whether defect or defect, between defects of humans or of garments or of houses³³ 13,14.. Words, that is the drinking of the suspected adulteress, breaking the neck of the calf, and the purification of the sufferer from skin disease³⁴ 5:23) and the expiation of an unsolved murder case requires the priests to recite words (Deut. 21:7–8), the purification of the the sufferer from skin disease is a wordless ceremony. Rashi in the Babli explains that skin disease is punishment for calumniating. One could explain that the first step in the purification is a declaration by a priest that the skin disease was healed and his command to assemble the items necessary for purification (Lev. 14:3–4).. Quarrels, these are estimations, bans, and dedications³⁵ 27; all of these need dedications by explicit declaration.. You shall get up, from the court, and rise, this is the ascent³⁶.

footnotes: ²⁷ This baraita ²⁰ Deut. ²⁸ The person representing the lower court before the Supreme Court has to be its most distinguished member. ²⁹ In the parallel sources: This is practice. Since the verse defines the areas of competence of the Supreme Court, it is difficult to see what the legal relevance of aggadah ³⁰ As Finkelstein points out, the plain text of the verse seems to restrict the objects of appeal to purely legal cases; the interpretation given here extends it to all areas of life. ³¹ This sentence is missing in the parallel sources; it already is contained in the other explanations of the same clause. ¹ This sentence is missing in the parallel sources; it already is contained in the other explanations of the same clause. ³² Cf. Chapter 10, Note 284. ³³ Lev. ³⁴ While the suspected adulteress drinks water with which written words were obliterated (Num. ³⁵ Lev. ³⁶ Climbing up all the way to Jerusalem.

Another explanation: You shall get up, from here that the Temple should be built only on the height of the world³⁷. What is the reason? For on My Holy Mountain, on the mountain of the height of Israel shall I plant it, that it may sprout branch and carry fruit³⁸ 17:23. For different approaches to the same statement, cf. Note 27, Babli Qiddušin 69a, Zevahim 54b, Sifry Deut. 37, end.. And you shall come³⁹. 17:9., to include the court at Jabneh. Rebbi Zeˋira says, to ask⁴⁰.

footnotes: ³⁷ When in fact the Temple Mount is conspicuously lower than the surrounding hills, to indicate that it is not a Canaanite High Place. ³⁸ Ez. ³⁹ Deut ⁴⁰ As Mishnah 6 shows, disobedience to a court not sitting in the ashlar hall is not a crime punishable by a human court; but nevertheless the obligation to ask the opinion of the Supreme Court in cases of doubt remains as long as such a court exists.Since Rabban Johanan ben Zakkai asked for “Jabneh and its Sages” from Vespasian, it follows that even during the times of the Temple an important academy existed at Jabneh (and since Miriam the Hasmonean in her will had given Jabneh to Empress Livia, this was the only place in all of Judea which Vespasian could not give away without declaring himself as emperor.)

A rebellious Elder who instructed to act and acted is punishable. If he instructed but did not act, he is not prosecutable. If he instructed not for application, he is not prosecutable. If he instructed for application, even if he himself did not act, he is punishable⁴¹. 155 infers from Deut. 17:12 which decrees the death penalty for the person who acts against the judgement which he heard from the Supreme Court that any person acting on instructions from a person who heard from the Supreme Court cannot be prosecuted. Therefore, the actions of persons acting on the instructions of a judge are considered actions of the judge, not those of his officers.. Rebbi Hila said, Rebbi Ismael stated thus: Who would act⁴ 17:12., even in he did not act himself. Rav Huna said, if he was instructing for practice and later a case came up, one acts on his instruction. If he taught it on the occasion of a case, one acts on it for others but not for himself⁴²77a in the name of Rav, Rav Huna’s teacher.).

footnotes: ⁴¹ Babli 88b. Sifry Deut ⁴ The Supreme Court sitting in the Temple court. Deut. ⁴² This is a general legal principle, applicable to civil as well as to criminal law. A legal doctrine formulated before a case arose can be applied to any case. But a doctrine formulated in the discussion of a case cannot be applied if the party formulating it is party to the case; that would be a conflict of interest (Babli Yebamot

⁴³ 6:8, Tosephta Sanhedrin11:8. In these sources, the original author is R. Simeon ben Iohai. Rebbi Simeon ben Menasia says: Beauty, and vigor, and riches, and wisdom, and white hair, and honor, and children, are an adornment for the just. What is the reason? A crown of glory is white hair; on the way of piety it is found⁴⁴ 16:31.. A crown of the elderly are grandchildren; the glory of children are their parents⁴⁵. 17:6.. The glory of the young is their force; the splendor of the elderly is white hair⁴⁶ 20.29.. And it says, before his Elders in honor⁴⁷ 24:23.. ⁴⁸ It was stated: Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, these seven qualities which the Sages enumerated for the just were all realized by Rebbi and his sons. Rebbi Joḥanan said, all seven qualities which the Sages enunciated about the just were in Rebbi. Who was Rebbi? Rebbi is Rebbi Jehudah the Prince. Rebbi Abbahu said, Rebbi is Rebbi Yudan the Prince, is Our Teacher⁴⁹.

footnotes: ⁴³ Mishnah Avot ⁴⁴ Prov. ⁴⁵ Prov ⁴⁶ Prov. ⁴⁷ Is ⁴⁸ This sentence has to be deleted since Rebbi’s father cannot speak about his son and grandsons. Since Rebbi was the last of the Tannaïm, only amoraic statements about him are legitimate. ⁴⁹ It is not clear whether he refers to R. Jehudah I ben Simeon, mentioned by R. Johanan, or to R. Jehudah II ben Gamliel.

MISHNAH: [Denial] about words of the Sopherim is more serious than about words of the Torah. He who says that there are no phylacteries, to transgress the words of the Torah, is not prosecutable. Five compartments to add to the words of the Sopherim is punishable⁵⁰ 6:8,11:18; *Ex.*13:16) is harmless since every schoolchild knows better. But the details of the construction of phylacteries are purely traditional , viz., that the phylacteries on the arm have to be put into one box but those of the head into four compartments. As Y. Yadin has noted in his publication on the phylacteries from the Judean desert, they are made in the way of rabbinic phylacteries (at least as they used to be made until 200 years ago, with boxes of 1 cm edge length) but the text contains many more than the authorized verses. These tefillin therefore have to be classified as non-rabbinical.. One executes him not at the court in his town, nor at the court at Jabneh⁵¹ but one transports him to the Supreme Court in Jerusalem, keeps him until a holiday of pilgrimage, and executes him on the holiday⁵² as it is said, the entire people shall see and fear⁵³ 17:13., the words of Rebbi Aqiba. Rebbi Jehudah says, one does not procrastinate in his case but executes him immediately, writes, and sends messengers to all places: Mr. A son of Mr. B was found guilty to be executed by the court.

footnotes: ⁵⁰ The person who denies a verse in the Torah (in this case Deut. ⁵¹ The nearby court of appeals. ⁵² On holiday eve when everybody had arrived. ⁵³ Deut.

HALAKHAH: “[Denial] about words of the Sopherim is more serious,” etc. Halakhah 6:“One executes him not,” etc. ⁵⁴ 1:7 (Notes 182–191) (ת). It is copied again in Avodah zarah 2:8 41c l. 46 (ע). The colleagues in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: The words of the Sopherim are related to the words of Scripture and are pleasant like the words of Scripture; your throat is like good wine⁵⁵7:10. Simeon bar Abba in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: The words of the Sopherim are related to the words of Scripture and are more pleasant than the words of Scripture, for your friendship is better than wine⁵⁶1:2.. Rebbi Abba bar Cohen in the name of Rebbi Judah bar Pazi: You may know that he words of the Sopherim are more pleasant than the words of Scripture, because if Rebbi Tarphon did not recite at all he would only have transgressed a positive commandment. But because he transgressed the words of the House of Hillel he should have suffered death since it says, if one breaches a wall he will be bitten by a snake⁵⁶1:2..

footnotes: ⁵⁴ This and the next paragraphs are from Berakhot ⁵⁵ Cant. ⁵⁶ Cant. ⁵⁶ Cant.

Rebbi Ismael stated: In the Torah there are forbidden matters and permitted matters. There are easy parts and severe parts. But in the words of the Sopherim all are severe. You can realize that this is so since we have stated: “He who says that there are no phylacteries, to transgress the words of the Torah, is not prosecutable. Five compartments to add to the words of the Sopherim is punishable.” Rebbi Ḥinena, the son of Rebbi Ada, in the name of Rebbi Tanḥum bar Ḥiyya: The words of the Sages carry more weight than those of the prophets since it is written, do not preach, they preach⁵⁸ 2:6.. And it is written, I shall preach to you for wine and liquor⁵⁹ 2:11.. The relation of prophet and scholar can be compared to the case of a king who sent two diplomatarii⁶⁰ 1:7 Note 189. to a province. About one of them it was written, if he does not show you my seal and σημαντήριον⁶¹ 1:7 Note 190., do not believe him. About the other it was written, even if he does not show you my seal and σημαντήριον, believe him. So about a prophet is written, he gives you a sign or miracle⁶². 13:2.. But here it is written, according to the teachings that they will teach you⁶³. 17:11..

footnotes: ⁵⁸ Micha ⁵⁹ Micha ⁶⁰ A person authorized to use the imperial mail; Berakhot ⁶¹ “Seal” in Greek; Berakhot ⁶² Deut ⁶³ Deut

The Torah said, four compartments for four paragraphs⁶⁴. 13:16, Deut.6:8,11:18) “head tefillin” is confirmed by the Babli’s use, Šabbat 57a, as “woman’s headband”. A fancy etymology, which reads the number 4 into the word, to support the statement that head phylacteries must bemade with four compartments (Sanhedrin 4b, Zevahim37b, Menahot 34b) is rabbinic.. If he made five compartments for four paragraphs, he is punishable. Rebbi Abba, Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Hoshaia: He is punishable only if he instructs in a matter whose root is from the Torah but whose explanation is from the words of the Sopherim; for example, the carcass; for example, the crawling animal, whose root is from the words of the Torah⁶⁵. 11 but the details, in particular the minimal quantities which induce impurity, are rabbinic. but whose explanation is from the words of the Sopherim. Rebbi Zeˋira said, he never is punishable unless he deny and instruct in a matter whose root is from the Torah but whose explanation is from the words of the Sopherim; for example, the carcass; for example, the crawling animal, whose root is from the words of the Torah but whose explanation is from the words of the Sopherim, on condition that he simultaneously deduct in a matter which permits subtraction and addition⁶⁶ of the kind found in the Judean desert (Note 50) are not considered.. The face of Rav⁶⁷ Hoshaia lit up⁶⁸. He⁶⁹ told him, do I need you that you enjoy it? I do not need you, I am adding to your statement. Thirteen years he⁶⁹ went and came before his teacher even though he did not need him. Rebbi Samuel in the name of Rebbi Zeˋura: Was it not enough for him to have paid his respects to his teacher since anybody who pays his respects to his teacher is as if he paid his respects to the Divine Presence. Rebbi Berekhiah objected, did we not state⁷⁰ 6:1; cf. Nedarim 3:2 Note 49, Maˋserot 5:7 Notes 122–125. Baheret is a skin disease in which white spots appear on the skin (Lev. 13). The minimum size of such a spot which makes its bearer impure is that of a “square split cilician bean” which is defined as 36 (hairwidths)². All questions are directed to R. Zeˋira; one tries to find a law other than that of phylacteries where a ruling by a rebellious Elder could simultaneously add and subtract from the received norm. It was shown in Masˋerot, by a question of R. Berekhiah, that square cannot mean that the white spot be an exact square, since nothing in biology exhibits geometrically straight lines and right angles. Therefore, the question can only be whether the spot must contain a square of minimal size or only have surface area of 36 (hairwidths)²., “the body of baheret is the square area of a split cilician bean”? Rebbi Abba Mari said, one who said it is pure⁷¹ 8:4) editio princeps has הכן “so”, which made the clause incomprehensible. In Maˋserot and Nedarim, it was determined that the Mishnah has to be read as referring to surface area. An elder who would read the Mishnah as requiring a white spot containing a square of minimal size would actually declare most impure spots as pure. This is diminution; nothing is added.. Rebbi Abba bar Mamal objected, did we not state⁷² 3:7. Again the obligation to write words of the Torah on one’s doorposts is biblical (Deut. 6:9,11:19) while the selection of the texts and the details are rabbinic. If one put the two texts into two cases instead of writing them on one sheet of parchment, it would be simultaneously adding and subtracting., “two paragraphs in the mezuzzah”? He told him, phylacteries and mezuzah are the same⁷³” one should accept “only tefillin and mezuzzot” as possible objects of the Elder’s misdeeds since both are mentioned together in the biblical texts.. Rav Hamnuna objected, was it not stated⁷⁴ 41b, Bekhorot 39b, determining the minimal length of the unknotted part of the ṣisit, the threads to be attached to the corners of one’s rectangular garment.: The ṣiṣit must be four finger lengths for four threads? He told him, in that he diminished but did not add⁷⁵. Rebbi Ḥaggai objected before Rebbi Yose, was it not stated⁷⁶ 7:1, Menaḥot 89a, Sifra Saw Pereq 11(6). The rules of a thanksgiving sacrifice (Lev. 7:12–14) require three kinds of unleavened oiled breads in addition to a set of leavened bread. The rabbinic interpretation requires that the flour be divided into three equal parts but that half of the oil be used on the unleavened bread scalded in hot water like a bagel, the rest being used for the other two kinds. If instead somebody instructed also to distribute the oil evenly, would he not subtract from one kind and add to the others?, one third for the scalded⁷⁷., one third for round cakes, one third for flat cakes. If he used it in thirds, one third for the scalded, one third for round cakes, one third for flat cakes? He told him, he subtracts from the scalded and adds for round cakes and flat cakes⁷⁸ as one commandment when in fact they are three different obligations; there is no simultaneity for one obligation..

footnotes: ⁶⁴ The word טטפת (Ex ⁶⁵ The different kinds of impurity of dead animals are described in Lev ⁶⁶ R. Zeˋira restricts the original saying of R. Hoshaia, which was extended by R. Johanan to include impurity of dead animals. In the Babli 88b it is asserted that in the interpretation here ascribed to R. Zeˋira the only crime a rebellious Elder could be charged with was to instruct to make head phylacteries not with four but with five compartments. Then he obviously adds to the number of compartments but at the same time, since one of the four texts now has to occupy two compartments, he eliminates the rule which determines the order in which the texts have to be placed into compartments. This is simultaneously adding and subtracting; from the following discussion (Notes 63–71) it follows that this also is the interpretation required for the Yerushalmi. It is clear that tefillin ⁶⁷ This should read “Rebbi”. ⁶⁸ He was happy that R. Johanan quoted him even though the extension to include carcasses and dead crawling animals was not his formulation. ⁶⁹ R. Johanan. ⁶⁹ R. Johanan. ⁷⁰ Mishnah Negaˋim ⁷¹ For ms. דכן “pure” (Mishnah Idiut ⁷² Mishnah Menahot ⁷³ It is agreed that instead of “only tefillin ⁷⁴ Menaḥot ⁷⁵ This is pure diminution; nothing is added. ⁷⁶ Mishnah Menahot ⁷⁷ Explanation of Rashi in Menaḥot ⁷⁸ The questioner considered all three kinds of mazzah

MISHNAH: And the false prophet and one who prophesies what he did not hear and what was not said to him⁷⁹. But as to one who suppresses his vision, and one who disregards the prophet’s words, and a prophet who transgressed his own word, their death is by the Hand of Heaven as it is said, I shall ask it from him⁸⁰. 18:19, cf. Sifry Deut. 177..

footnotes: ⁷⁹ These are cases for the human court. ⁸⁰ Deut

HALAKHAH: “And the false prophet,” etc. “And one who prophesies what he did not hear,” like Ṣedekias ben Kenaana⁸¹. 22:11, Babli 89a.. “And what was not said to him,” like Ḥanania ben Azzur. Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, Ḥanania ben Azzur was a true prophet;⁸² only he took instruction⁸³ and heard what Jeremiah prophesied in the upper market; he went and prophesied in the lower market. Ḥanania ben Azzur told him, is not the essence⁸⁴. of the matter only once seventy years will be fullfilled for Babylon, I shall remember you⁸⁵. 29:10.. In all, the days of Manasse were 55 years. Deduct from them 20 years for which the Heavenly Court does not punish or extirpate, add the two of Amon and 31 of Josia⁸⁶ 2:1, Note 13, Babli Šabbat 89b.) Josia became king at age 8; his 31 years therefore should be reduced to 23 but, since he was the only good king following Manasse, he should not be counted at all. Adding then 2 for Amon, 11 for Joyakim, and 5 for Sedekias, one only obtains 65 years (or 66 if a full year is counted for Joyachin.). That is what is written⁸⁷.28:1–3.: At the beginning of the reign of Ṣedekias the king of Jehudah, in the fifth⁸⁸ year, in the fifth month, Ḥanania ben Azzur, the prophet from Gibeon, said to me in the House of the Eternal, before the priests and all the people, as follows: So said the Eternal of Hosts, the God of Israel, as follows. I broke the yoke of the king of Babylon; in another two years I shall return to this place all the Temple vessels which Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylon, took from this city and brought to Babylon. Jeremiah told him, you are saying thatin another two years I shall return, etc. But I say that Nebuchadnezzar will come and take the remainder. To Babylon they will be brought and stay there⁸⁹. 27:22., etc. He⁹⁰ said to him, give a sign. He⁹¹ answered, I am prophesying bad things and cannot give a sign for my words since the Holy One, praise to Him, said to bring evil and might refrain from it⁹². But you prophesy good things; you are obligated to give a sign. He⁹⁰ said to him, no, it is you who has to give a sign for your words. He⁹¹ answered, if it is so, I shall give a sign and miracle in the person of that man; this year he dies, for he spoke obstinately about the Eternal. This happened to him; Ḥanania the prophet died in this year, in the Seventh month⁹³. 28:17. While the Talmud assumes that the “Day of Remembrance,” the first of the seventh month, always was New Year’s Day, it is clear that Jer. follows the Judean calendar which starts the year in Spring.. This was another year and you are saying so? But it teaches that he died on the Eve of New Year’s Day and ordered his sons and wife to hide the matter, that they should bury him after the new Year in order to falsify Jeremiah’s prophecy.

footnotes: ⁸¹ 1K ⁸² Since Jeremiah called him a prophet. ⁸³ Deriving the unexplained word קיבוסת from Arabic قنس which among other meanings also signifies “to take instructions from somebody.” The background is explained in the Babli, 89a: Since Hanania had heard Jeremiah predict the downfall of Elam, which the talmudic authors take as an ally, not an adversary, of Babylonia, and concluded that if the ally fell, the principal would fall with him. ⁸⁴ Explaining סמא either from Arabic سما “to be high” or from Latin summa ⁸⁵ Jer ⁸⁶ This follows the author of Kings who puts all blame for the Babylonian exile on Manasse. While the numbers add up to 68, they make no sense. Manasse became king at age 12, therefore he was responsible during 47 years of kingship. (For the doctrine that people become responsible adults in the eyes of Heaven at age 20, cf. Bikkurim ⁸⁷ Jer ⁸⁸ In the verse: fourth. ⁸⁹ Jer ⁹⁰ Hananiah. ⁹¹ Jeremiah. ⁹² This is generally accepted; repentance always may avert evil. ⁹⁰ Hananiah. ⁹¹ Jeremiah. ⁹³ Jer

“And one who suppresses his prophecy,” like Jonah ben Amitai⁹⁴. Rebbi Jonah said, Jonah ben Amitai was a true prophet. You find that when the Holy One, praise to Him, told him, get up and go to the great city of Nineveh and call out over it that their evil came before Me⁹⁵ 1:2., Jonah said, I know that Gentiles are close to repentance; if I would go and prophesy for them and they repented, the Holy One, praise to Him, would make himself paid from the haters of Israel⁹⁶. What can I do? I must flee! Jonah got up to flee to Tarshish from before the Eternal; he descended to Jaffa, found a ship destined for Tarshish, paid his fare and entered it,⁹⁷ 1:3.” etc.

footnotes: ⁹⁴ Babli 89a; Tosephta 14:15. ⁹⁵ Jonah ⁹⁶ I. e., punish Israel for not repenting. ⁹⁷ Jonah

“And one who disregards the prophet’s words.” Like the seer Ido⁹⁸20:35) and the prophet who disregards his own words like the seer Ido (mentioned in 2Chr. 12:15 who in all talmudic sources is identified as the anonymous “prophet from Jehudah” in 1K. 13). R. Samuel bar Rav Isaac said, the old prophet living in Bethel (1K. 13:11) is Amasiah the priest of Bethel (Am. 7:12).. Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac said, this is Amaṣiah the priest of Bethel. Rebbi Yose said, this is breaking of eggs⁹⁹; who is it? He is Jonathan ben Gershom ben Manasse¹⁰⁰ 9:3, Note 135). To support this assertion, the next paragraph is a rearrangement of a text in Berakhot 9:3 (Notes 128–135); it lacks the punch line that Jonathan was the old prophet..

footnotes: ⁹⁸ The text is lacunary. One must read with the Tosephta (14:15) and the Babli (89b): One who disregards the prophet’s words, like the companion of Micha (1K. ⁹⁹ R. Samuel bar Rav Isaac spoke in error; the old prophet at the time of Jeroboam I cannot be the priest at the time of Jeroboam II. ¹⁰⁰ Jonathan ben Gershom ben Moses, as asserted in an anonymous note (Berakhot

You find that when David came and found him serving foreign worship, he asked him: You are the grandson of that righteous man and you worship idols? He¹ show that Jonathan is the speaker. said to him, I have a tradition from my grandfather, sell yourself to foreign worship rather than need other people. He said to him; Heaven forbid! He did not say so, but rather sell yourself to work that is strange to you rather than need other people. When David saw that he loved money, he made him Count²“associate, partner”, a Byzantine title for a high-level bureaucrat. The combination תֵּיסַווְרִין עַל־הָאוֹצָרוֹת is a Greek-Hebrew double expression. of the Temple treasuries. That is what is written, Shabuel ben Gershom ben Moshe, overseer of the treasuries. “Shabuel” because he returned to God with all his might; “overseer of the treasuries” that he made him Count of the treasuries.

footnotes: ¹ Italics ² Latin comes

The colleagues asked before Rebbi Samuel ben Naḥman: He was a priest of idol worship and lived so long? He said to them, because he was grudging to his idol. How was he grudging to his idol? If a man came to sacrifice an ox, a sheep, or a goat to the idol and told him: Make it favorably inclined towards me, he would say, what use does it have for you? It never eats, nor drinks, nor does good or evil. He said to him, what should we do? He said to him, go, make, and bring me a wooden vessel full of fine flour and put on it ten eggs, then I shall make it favorably inclined towards you. After he left, he would eat it. One day, a son of pashas came and he said that to him. He said to him, if it is of no use, what are you doing here? He answered him, because of my livelihood.

They objected to Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman: Until the day the Land went into exile. He said to them, when David died, Solomon rose and exchanged all his counselors¹. He returned to his former bad ways.

footnotes: ¹ A description of Byzantine practices.

“And a prophet who transgressed his own word,” like the companion of Micha¹⁰¹. That is what is written¹⁰². 13:11–20. The verses obviously are quoted from memory.: An old prophet was dwelling at Bethel; his son came and told him all the actions which the man of God had wrought, etc. Their father asked them, which way did he go, etc. He told his sons, saddle the donkey for me, etc. He followed the man of God and found him sitting under the terebinth, etc. He said to him, come with me to my house and eat. He told him, I cannot return, etc., up to he said to him, I also am a prophet like you and an angel spoke to me the words of the Eternal as follows, etc., up to he should eat food and drink water; he tricked him. What means “tricked him”? He lied to him. While they were sitting at table, the word of the Eternal came to the prophet who had turned him back. It is not written “who had returned,” but “who had turned him back.” Is that not an argument de minore ad majus? Since one who fed his neighbor food in falsehood was worthy of the Word to be addressed to him, one who feeds his neighbor food in truth, so much more.

footnotes: ¹⁰¹ This should read: “the prophet Ido” (Note 91). ¹⁰² 1K

It is written¹⁰³. 20:35–42.: One of the young prophets said to his neighbor by the Word of the Eternal, etc. He told him, since you did not listen to the Word of the Eternal, when you depart from me the lion will hit you; he departed from him, the lion found him and hit him. He found another man, said to him, hit me, and he hit him¹⁰⁴ which later (Note 101) will be shown to be essential. etc. The prophet went, stood in the king’s way, and had disguised himself by a band over his eyes. When the king passed by, he cried to the king, etc. Your servant went to and fro, etc. He told him, so says the Eternal: Because you sent away from your hand the man whom I had banned, your life will be for his life, and your people for his people. And it is written¹⁰⁵ 1(43). The full verse reads: The man of God approached and said to the king of Israel and said, …: The man of God approached and said, so says the Eternal. Why two times “and said”? But in the first address he told him, if Ben Hadad falls into you hand, do not have mercy on him and do not spare him. In the second address he told him, because you sent away from your hand the man whom I had banned, how many traps and hunting nets¹⁰⁶ I made for him until I delivered him into your hand, and you sent him away and he went in peace. Therefore, your life will be for his life, and your people for his people. You find that when Israel went to war, nobody of them died but Ahab, the king of Israel. That is what is written¹⁰⁷. 22:34.: A man shot from his bow without aiming and hit the king of Israel between the joints of his armor; he told the driver, take me out of the camp because I became sick. How can I confirm your people for his people? Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Ioḥai: That drop of blood which was drawn from the just man¹⁰⁸ 9 = Ex. rabba 35(4), Lev. rabba 2(1).] did atone for all of Israel.

footnotes: ¹⁰³ 1K ¹⁰⁴ The quote stops short of he injured him ¹⁰⁵ Threni rabbati ¹⁰⁶ Identifying חרם حرم “ban” with חרם خرم “netting”. ¹⁰⁷ 1K ¹⁰⁸ The prophet who was injured (Note 103). The suffering of the Just as atonement for the entire people is an idea found in apocryphal literature such as IV Maccabees; in rabbinic texts otherwise only in Midrash literature [Tanhuma Wayyaqhel

MISHNAH: One who prophesies in the name of foreign worship¹⁰⁹ and says, so speaks the foreign worship, even if he stated practice correctly to declare the impure impure and the pure pure. One who copulates with a married woman, from the moment she is in the husband’s domain for definitive marriage even if she did not have intercourse¹¹⁰, one who copulates with her is strangled. And the false witnesses of a Cohen’s daughter and her paramour. Therefore all false witnesses are executed by that death except for the false witnesses of a Cohen’s daughter and her paramour¹¹¹. 19:19) you shall do to him what he intended to do to his brother. Therefore, it is impossible to punish the perjured witnesses of a Cohen’s daughter by exactly the death they intended to bring her to. This is the introduction to the next Chapter (Makkot 1 - Sanhedrin12) which starts by exploring the punishment of perjured witnesses accusing a Cohen of breaking priestly rules..

footnotes: ¹⁰⁹ Who is strangled, Mishnah 11:1. ¹¹⁰ The preliminarily married virgin and her paramour are stoned. But once she entered the place where the definitive marriage is scheduled to take place, even though she still is a virgin, her adultery is punished by strangulation. This presupposes that the definitive marriage is celebrated on the husband’s property. ¹¹¹ The whoring daughter of a Cohen is burned only if she committed adultery while married (Chapter 7, Notes 8–12). But the adulterer with a married woman is strangled. The perjured witnesses have to be executed in the way the adulterer would have been executed had their testimony stood up in court since (Deut

HALAKHAH: “One who prophesies in the name of foreign worship,” etc. ¹¹² Haˋedah it seems that the quote from the Ten Commandments (Ex. 20:16) was induced by the parallel text at the beginning of the next Halakhah and should be replaced by Deut. 18:22. The argument would go as follows: In Deut. 18:20–22, the court is commanded to punish the false prophet by a death sentence. The manner of execution is not specified; this implies that it must be by strangling. But in 13:2–12 the punishment of strange worship (idolatry) is stoning. A person can be punished as a false prophet only if first he had established his credentials as a prophet by a sign or a miracle (Deut. 13:2, 18:22; Note 106). Then if the prophet argues for idolatry, even if he does not abolish any commandment of the Torah, he has to be punished (even if he propagates foreign worship in the name of the Eternal; Babli 89b). If he tells others not to obey some of the precepts of the Torah, for the Sages he is punishable, but not for R. Simeon. The prophet can be prosecuted only if he induces others to neglect Torah precepts, not if he himself seemingly violates them by Divine Command, as Elijah did on Mount Carmel, sacrificing on an altar which was authorized only for him. Qorban Haˋedah gives a reconstruction of the paragraph which is not impossible but not supported by any parallel evidence. In the word פיונטייה the ending יֵהּ is the possessive suffix “his”. For the remaining פיונטי the best available conjecture is Kohut’s, Latin punitio, -onis “punishment” [or poenaria (actiones), punishable (actions) (E. G.)]. Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, everything was included in do not testify against your neighbor as a false witness. It came to judge whether by sign, or by miracle, whether about foreign worship or any other commandment. But about foreign worship, whether he intended to uproot the entire body or did not intend to uproot the entire body, by the words of Rebbi Simeon one does not prosecute him, but by the words of the Sages one stones him. For any other commandment by the words of the Sages one stones him, by the words of Rebbi Simeon he should understand his pywnṭ.

footnotes: ¹¹² This paragraph is thoroughly corrupt; the meaning can be understood approximately by reference to Tosephta 14:13: “He who prophesies to uproot one of the words of the Torah is punishable. Rebbi Simeon says, if he prophesies to uproot one of the words of the Torah but affirms others he cannot be prosecuted; but about foreign worship, even if he endorses it today but reneges tomorrow he is punishable.”With Qorban

If a prophet starts to prophesy, one listens to him if he gives a sign or miracle; otherwise one does not listen to him¹¹³ 13:2. It is no disrespect to Heaven if one disregards the sayings of an unqualified prophet.. Two prophets who prophesied indentically, two prophets who prophesied in the same sense¹¹⁴) is preferable to reading בְכָרָךְ אֶחָד “in the same fortified place” (Qorban Haˋedah).? Rebbi Isaac and Rebbi Hoshaia: One said, each one has to provide a sign or a miracle; the other said, not each one has to provide a sign or a miracle¹¹⁵. The one who said he did objected to the one who said he did not: Is it not written¹¹⁶. 20:8., Ezekias said to Isaias, what is the sign? He told him, that is different since he was occupied in reviving the dead. He shall revive us after two days; on the third day He will lift us up and we shall live before Him¹¹⁷. 6:2. The verse is the basic source for the belief that the resurrection has to be on the third day, or that souls have to suffer punishment for their misdeeds while alive for two days and on the third day are admitted to Paradise (Berakhot 5:2 Note 64; Taˋaniot 1:1 63d l.52). Ezekias was declared ready to die (2K. 20:1) and was well enough to go to the Temple on the third day; this shows that his recovery was indeed a resurrection..

footnotes: ¹¹³ Deut. ¹¹⁴ This reading (Pene Moshe ¹¹⁵ But the accredited prophet can legitimate his companion. ¹¹⁶ 2K ¹¹⁷ Hos

¹¹⁸ 4:7, Notes 154–160. Rebbi Jehudah ben Pazi said. not only to the bridal chamber but also to a house containing the bridal chamber¹¹⁹ (except Makkot 1:13–2:7) there exists a Genizah fragment (G) edited (with readings compared to the Krotoschin Yerushalmi) by S. Wieder, Tarbiz 17 (1946) 130–135.. The following is problematic: Dining room¹²⁰. and bedroom¹²¹, bridal chamber and bedroom; if she entered the dining room, for which consequence¹²²? Rebbi Joḥanan said, to inherit from her¹²³, the name is R. Eleazar. Therefore, the illegible name in G cannot be emended to “R. Johanan” as given in Tarbiz 17.. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, to dissolve her vows¹²⁴, Chapters 10,11.. Rebbi Zeˋira said, even though Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, to dissolve her vows, he agrees that he cannot actually dissolve them before she enters the bridal chamber¹²⁵. Rebbi Huna¹²⁶ said, a verse supports Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: to whore in her father’s house¹²⁷. 22:21.. This excludes the case where the father’s agents handed her over to the husband’s agents, that she could not be stoned, but is strangled¹²⁸.

footnotes: ¹¹⁸ his now refers to the adulterous definitively married woman. A closely related text is Ketubot ¹¹⁹ Where the definitive marriage is contracted. This חוּפָּה is not the wedding canopy used today, but a room where the newlyweds will consummate the marriage and spend the following week.From here to the end of Sanhedrin-Makkot ¹²⁰ Greek τρικλίνιον, τó, Latin triclinium ¹²¹ Cf. Chapter 7:19, Note 363. ¹²² Before the definitive marriage ceremony. ¹²³ As definitive husband, if the woman died before entering the bridal chamber. Since this idea is not followed up, it does not represent practice. In Ketubot ¹²⁴ Nedarim ¹²⁵ If the time allotted to the husband to dissolve his wife’s vows elapses between the arrival of his bride at his home when she stated the fact of her vows and the definitive marriage ceremony, he lost his right of dissolution. ¹²⁶ In G, “Huna” is corrected to “Jonah”. ¹²⁷ Deut ¹²⁸ A preliminarily married virgin who no longer is in her father's charge is treated in criminal law as if she already were definitively married. Babli Ketubot 49a .

Similarly by burning, she and they by burning. Similarly by stoning, she and they by stoning. Similarly by strangulation, she and they by strangulation¹²⁹.

footnotes: ¹²⁹ This refers to the perjured witnesses. The text is a copy from Halakhah 7:1, Note 17; Tosephta 14:17. If no man is involved, the perjured witnesses are punished by what the woman would have suffered had their testimony been truthful.