ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Sanhedrin 63
SANHEDRIN 63 (8 Kislev) - Dedicated l'Iluy Nishmas: Shoshana Raizel bas Reb
Yisrael Leib -- Mrs. Rose Shaw -- on the second Yahrzeit of her passing, by
her son, Dr. Allen Shaw (Atlanta), and grandchildren, Sheila Jutan and
family (Singapore) and Yisrael Shaw and family (Jerusalem).
(a) As the source for Rebbi Ami's Din 'Zivach ve'Kitar ve'Nisach be'He'elam
Echad Eino Chayav Ela Echad', Abaye quotes the Pasuk - "Lo Sa'avdem"
('ha'Kasuv As'an Avodah Achas').
(b) From the two of the three Hishtachavayos, Abaye himself learns ke'Darkah
and she'Lo ke'Darkah. From the third Hishtachavayah, he learns - Lechalek
(that one is Chayav as many Chata'os as the Avodos that one performed).
(c) The three Hishtachavayos in question are "Lo Sishtachaveh Lahem" in the
first Aseres ha'Dibros, "Ki Lo Sishtachaveh le'Eil Acher" in Ki Sisa, and
"Lo Sishtachaveh l'Eloheihem" in Mishpatim. He ignores a fourth
Hishtachavayah in the second Aseres ha'Dibros - because the second Dibros
are merely a repetition of what Moshe learned on Har Sinai.
(d) Abaye, who learns that the third Hishtachavayah 'le'Chalek Yatzas',
discusses Rebbi Ami, who obviously does not explain Hishtachavayah in this
way - in order to explain his opinion, even though personally, he disagrees
(a) According to Rebbi Ami - the third 'Hishtachavayah le'La'av Yatzas' (to
preclude it from Kareis).
(b) We learn from the Pasuk "Eichah Ya'avdu" - that one is Chayav for any
Avodah that is ke'Darkah (even though it is not one of the four Avodos
listed in our Mishnah).
(c) The problem this creates with Abaye is - why he then needs one
Hishtachavayah to teach us ke'Darkah?
(d) We therefore amend Abaye's statement. When he says ...
1. ... 'ke'Darkah', he means 'ke'Darkah ve'she'Lo ke'Darkah', which refers
to an image that is not worshipped by Hishtachavayah, but it is Kedarkah
inasmuch as it is worshipped in a respectable manner.
(e) In spite of what we just learned, Rebbi Elazar above learned from "ve'Lo
Yizbechu", 'Zove'ach le'Markulis', and not first Zove'ach (Shochet) to an
idol that is worshipped Derech Kavod, like Rebbi Ami did - because in that
regard at least, he took this for granted, taking his cue from the
'Hishtachavayah' of Rebbi Ami.
2. ... 'she'Lo Kedarkah - refers to prostrating oneself before Pe'or, which
is she'Lo Kedarkah even with regard to the fact that it is worshipped in a
degrading manner (with only one Pasuk we would have included the former, and
precluded the latter).
(a) Rav Nachman ... Amar Rav rules that someone who declares to an image
'Eili Atah' - is Chayav.
(b) If he meant 'Chayav Miysah', then his statement would be redundant -
since we already know this from our Mishnah.
(c) So we establish Rav by a Chiyuv Chatas be'Shogeg, from which one might
be Patur, even though he is Chayav Sekilah for having done the same
be'Meizid - because by Chatas, the Torah writes "ve'Asah Achas mi'Kol
Mitzvos Hashem", which teaches us that a Chatas requires an act (and not
(a) We learned in a Beraisa 'Eino Chayav Ela al Davar she'Yesh Bo Ma'aseh,
K'gon Zivu'ach ve'Kitur ve'Nisuch ve'Hishtachavayah'. Resh Lakish
establishes the author as Rebbi Akiva - because he does not require a full
act, whereas according to the Rabbanan, who do, Hishtachavayah should be
omitted from the Beraisa.
(b) When Rav rules that 'Eili Atah' is Chayav a Korban - he is referring to
the opinion of Rebbi Akiva, who also obligates someone who prostrates
himself before the idol to bring a Korban.
(c) Nevertheless, Rav needed to tell us this, despite the fact that Megadef
brings a Korban, as Rebbi Akiva has already taught us (despite the fact that
it is only Dibur) - because the Torah specifically writes Kareis by a
Megadef, but not by 'Eili Atah'.
(d) According to Rav, Rebbi Akiva learns from the Pasuk "va'Yishtachavu Lo
va'Yizbechu Lo va'Yomru Eileh Elohecha Yisrael ... " - that 'Eili Atah' is
compared to Zevichah, with regard to Kareis and Chatas.
(e) Rebbi Akiva conform with the Pasuk "ve'Asah" mentioned by Korban Chatas,
by sufficing with a 'Ma'aseh Kol-Dehu' (a slight act). He therefore
obligates a Chatas for ...
1. ... Hishtachavayah - because he considers 'Kefifas Gufo' (bending the
body) an act.
2. ... Megadef and 'Eili Atah' - because he considers 'Akimas Sefasav'
(moving one's lips ... ) an act, too (In fact, according to Rebbi Akiva,
"ve'Asah" precludes only a sin with one's thoughts).
(a) According to Rebbi Yochanan - if not for the 'Vav' in the word 'Asher
*He'elu'cha* me'Eretz Mitzrayim" (implying that Yisrael at least considered
Hashem a joint redeemer with the Golden Calf) - they would have been
(b) This conforms with the opinion of Acherim in a Beraisa. Rebbi Shimon
objects to this however, based on the Pasuk ''Bilti la'Hashem Levado" -
which forbids combining Hashem with idols no less than worshipping idols on
their own (see Agados Maharsha).
(c) So Rebbi Shimon explains "Asher He'elucha me'Eretz Mitzrayim" to mean -
that they had a strong desire to worship other gods, even going so far as to
do so, only not on a par with Hashem, but as intermediaries (see Agados
(a) We initially think that Rav Dimi Amar Rebbi Elazar exempts someone who
makes a Neder or a Shevu'ah in the name of an idol from Malkus - because it
is La'av she'Ein Bo Ma'aseh.
(b) The problem with the other half of his statement, sentencing someone who
embraces or kisses an idol, or sweeps or settles the dust in front of it, to
Malkos is - that they should be exempt too, since they are all 'La'avin
(c) The La'av he transgresses is - either "ve'Lo Seilchun Acharei Elohim
Acherim" (Yirmiyah) or that of "Al Tifnu el ha'Elilim" (Kedoshim), provided
this is not the way that they are usually worshipped.
(a) We learn the P'tur from Malkos by a 'La'av she'bi'Kelalus' from Ravin
Amar Rebbi Elazar (or Rav Avin bar Kahana) who is referring to the La'av
of - "Lo Sochlu al ha'Dam" (Kedoshim).
(b) What the prohibitions of not eating either part of an animal before it
is dead or from a Kodshim animal before the blood has been sprinkled, and
the prohibition of not offering a Se'udas Havra'ah to the family of someone
who was put to death by the Beis-Din have in common is - the fact that they
are all included in the La'av of "Lo Sochlu al ha'Dam" (The latter is
forbidden so as to afford them an atonement for their sin).
(c) The first two are statements of the Tana Kama, the latter, of Rebbi
Dosa. Rebbi Akiva adds the prohibition of Beis-Din who have sentenced
someone to death to eat for the rest of the day. Rebbi Yochanan (the Amora)
adds - that "Lo Sochlu al ha'Dam" is a warning for a ben Sorer u'Moreh
(since the Torah would not issue the death-penalty without an accompanying
(d) Rav Avin bar Chiya (or Ravin bar Kahana) comments - that none of these
five interpretations of the La'av receives Malkos, because they are all
'La'avin she'bi'Kelalus' (see Tosfos DH 'Al Kulam').
(a) As a result of the above Kashya, Ravin reverses Rebbi Elazar's two
statements, exempting someone who embraces, kisses, sweeps or settles the
dust in front of an idol from Malkos. He sentences someone who makes a Neder
or a Shevu'ah in the name of an idol to Malkos, in spite of the fact that it
is a 'La'av she'Ein Bo Ma'aseh' - according to Rebbi Yehudah, who holds
'Lokin al La'av she'Ein Bo Ma'aseh.
(b) According to Rebbi Yehudah in a Beraisa, the La'av of leaving over the
Korban Pesach until the morning is not subject to Malkos, because it is
followed by an Asei to burn it (making it a 'La'av ha'Nitak la'Asei').
(c) Rebbi Ya'akov maintains - that this is not necessary, due to the far
more basic reason of 'La'av she'Ein Bo Ma'aseh'.
(d) Rebbi Yehudah disagrees with Rebbi Ya'akov - because he holds 'La'av
she'Ein Bo Ma'aseh Lokin Alav'.
(a) The Beraisa learns the Isur of Noder or Mekayem bi'Shemo from the second
half of the Pasuk "Lo Yishama al Picha". From the first half of the Pasuk
"ve'Sheim Elohim Acherim Lo Sazkiru" he learns - that one may not even
mention the idol's name in one's day-to-day speech, such as 'Wait for me by
such-and-such an idol'.
(b) The Tana adds to 'Lo Yidor bi'Shemo ve'Lo Yekayem bi'Shemo' - that one
may not even cause someone to swear by its name (which he derives from the
Lashon "Lo Yishama"), in support of Shmuel's father ...
(c) ... who forbids entering into a partnership with a Nochri, since, should
the need to swear arise, he is bound to swear by his god.
(d) The La'av for Meisis is written in its own Parshah "ve'Chol Yisrael ...
ve'Lo Yosifu La'asos". The La'av for Medi'ach is - "Lo Yishama al Picha".
(a) When, after Ula had told Rava that he stayed overnight in Kalnevo, the
latter queried the fact that he had mentioned the name of a god, he replied
with a statement of Rebbi Yochanan, who ruled that the names of idols
mentioned in T'nach (which have since become obsolete) are permitted.
(b) We then quote the Pasuk "Kara Beil *Kar*as *Nevo*" - to prove that
karnevo is indeed mentioned in T'nach (bearing in mind that a 'Lamed' and a
'Resh' are interchangeable.
(c) The equivalent in time with regard to the Shiur of one extended Zivus
(which takes the place of three) which corresponds to 'from the time it
takes to go from Migdeyon to Shiloh, given by the Beraisa - is the time it
takes to make two Tevilos and to dry oneself each time.
(d) Even though Migdeyon (named after the image in that town), is not
mentioned in the Torah explicitly, we reconcile this with Rebbi Yochanan's
ruling - by pointing out that 'gad' [which is the root of Migdeyon] is
mentioned (in Yeshayah "ha'Orchim le'gad Shulchan").
(a) We know that Letzanus (mockery) is forbidden. Rav Nachman proves from
the above Pasuk - that the one exception is the mockery of idolatry, which
the Pasuk demonstrates when it describes how the image bent on its knees and
defecated, because it could no longer hold itself back.
(b) And along similar lines, we amend the Pasuk in Hoshe'a, which in
connection with the priests of Beis Aven, writes "Yagilu Alav al Kevodo Ki
Galah Mimenu" - from "al Kevodo" to "al Keveido", meaning that the priests
were pleased when their god defacated, thereby lightening the load that they
had to carry on their shoulders.
(c) The literal meaning of the Pasuk is - that they were pleased when their
god went into exile, thereby lightening the load that had to carry (the
Pasuk really refers to the exile of the calves from Beis-Eil at the hand of
(d) Based on another prophecy of Hoshe'a, Rebbi Yitzchak describes the
practice of the people, who would walk around with the image that they had
made with their silver and gold, in their pockets. From time to time, they
would produce it and hug it and kiss it.
(a) Rebbi Yitzchak quoting de'Bei Rebbi Ami based on the Pasuk there
"Zovchei Adam Agalim Yishakun" explains - that the priests would make a bust
of a wealthy person (whose wealth they fancied), which they would place
beside the feeding-trough of the animals that they worshipped, and which
they now began to starve. When the animals, who had fixed the image of the
man in their minds, would begin running after him (thinking that he was the
man who provided their food, the priests would convince him that their gods
wanted him, and that he should sacrifice himself to them. When he did, they
took his money (See Agados Maharsha).
(b) Rava claims that, in that case, the Navi ought to have written "Agalim
Yishakun li'Zebo'ach Adam". Consequently, *he* explains the Pasuk to
mean - that the priests would tell anyone who had sacrificed his son to
their gods that he had done a great thing and that he should now come and
kiss the god.
(c) Rav Yehudah Amar Rev explains the Pasuk in Melachim which describes how
the people of Bavel made 'Sukos Benos' and the people of Kus, Nergol, the
people of Chamas, Ashima and the Avim, Nivchaz and Tartak'. If ...
1. ... Sukos Benos was an image in the shape of a hen, Nergol was an image
in the shape of - a rooster.
(d) The S'farvim would burn their children to their gods Adarmelech and
Anmelech, which were in the shape of a mule and a horse, respectively. Rav
Yehudah explains the name ...
2. ... Ashima was a goat, Nivchaz and Tartak were - a dog and a donkey,
1. ... 'Adarmelech' to mean - 'honor to the King' (i.e. its master),
referring to the service of the mule, which carries its master's burdens on
(e) Achaz passed his son Chizkiyahu through the fires of S'farvim. The
latter survived however - by the grace of his mother, who had the foresight
to smear him with salamander oil (from a lizard that is born in an oven that
has been burning for seven years), which renders a person immune to fire.
2. ... 'Anmelech' to mean - 'it responds to its master (in war)', which was
one of the prime functions of a horse.
(a) Yisrael were not convinced at all of the Avodah-Zarah which they served
so consistently - and they only worshipped it as an excuse to permit
themselves to behave immorally in public.
(b) The analogy Rebbi Elazar gives to describe the Pasuk "ki'Zechor Beneihem
Mizbechosam" is - like a child who yearns for his father (that is how they
remembered their altars).
(c) To reconcile this with Rav Yehudah Amar Rav's previous statement - we
establish Rebbi Elazar after they became accustomed to worshipping
Avodah-Zarah, and it had become ingrained.
(a) When Eliyahu ha'Tzadik was walking around Yerushalayim among those who
were dying of hunger - he discovered a child lying among the dying.
(b) After ascertaining that his entire family had perished, he advised the
child - to recite the first Pasuk of the Sh'ma daily, in order to save his
(c) Before producing his god, hugging and kissing it and suffering a
terrible death, the child said - 'Hush, one may not mention that (the Name
of Hashem)', because his father had never taught him to say it. This too,
speaks after worshipping idols had become ingrained.
(d) The Pasuk in Bechukosai which foretells of this tragedy is - "ve'Nasati
Pigreichem al Pigrei Giluleichem".