Sanhedrin 104
|
BET MIDRASH VIRTUALI
of the Rabbinical Assembly in Israel
RABIN MISHNAH STUDY GROUP
|
|
|
הַמֵּסִית, זֶה הֶדְיוֹט שֶׁהֵסִית, וְהַמֵּסִית אֶת הַהֶדְיוֹט. אָמַר לוֹ יֵשׁ יִרְאָה בְּמָקוֹם פְּלוֹנִי, כָּךְ אוֹכֶלֶת, כָּךְ שׁוֹתָה, כָּךְ מְטִיבָה, כָּךְ מְרִיעָה. כָּל חַיָּבֵי מִיתוֹת שֶׁבַּתּוֹרָה אֵין מַכְמִינִין עֲלֵיהֶם, חוּץ מִזּוֹ. אָמַר לִשְׁנַיִם וְהֵן עֵדָיו, מְבִיאִין אוֹתוֹ לְבֵית דִּין וְסוֹקְלִין אוֹתוֹ. אָמַר לְאֶחָד, הוּא אוֹמֵר יֶשׁ לִי חֲבֵרִים רוֹצִים בְּכָךְ. אִם הָיָה עָרוּם וְאֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְדַבֵּר בִּפְנֵיהֶם, מַכְמִינִין לוֹ עֵדִים אֲחוֹרֵי הַגָּדֵר, וְהוּא אוֹמֵר לוֹ אֱמוֹר מַה שֶּׁאָמַרְתָּ לִי בְיִחוּד, וְהַלָּה אוֹמֵר לוֹ, וְהוּא אוֹמֵר לוֹ הֵיאַךְ נַנִּיחַ אֶת אֱלֹהֵינוּ שֶׁבַּשָּׁמַיִם וְנֵלֵךְ וְנַעֲבוֹד עֵצִים וַאֲבָנִים. אִם חוֹזֵר בּוֹ, הֲרֵי זֶה מוּטָב. וְאִם אָמַר כָּךְ הִיא חוֹבָתֵנוּ וְכָךְ יָפֶה לָנוּ, הָעוֹמְדִין מֵאֲחוֹרֵי הַגָּדֵר מְבִיאִין אוֹתוֹ לְבֵית דִּין וְסוֹקְלִין אוֹתוֹ. הָאוֹמֵר אֶעֱבוֹד, אֵלֵךְ וְאֶעֱבוֹד, נֵלֵךְ וְנַעֲבוֹד. אֲזַבֵּחַ, אֵלֵךְ וַאֲזַבֵּחַ, נֵלֵךְ וּנְזַבֵּחַ. אַקְטִיר, אֵלֵךְ וְאַקְטִיר, נֵלֵךְ וְנַקְטִיר. אֲנַסֵּךְ, אֵלֵךְ וַאֲנַסֵּךְ, נֵלֵךְ וּנְנַסֵּךְ. אֶשְׁתַּחֲוֶה, אֵלֵךְ וְאֶשְׁתַּחֲוֶה, נֵלֵךְ וְנִשְׁתַּחֲוֶה. הַמַּדִּיחַ, זֶה הָאוֹמֵר נֵלֵךְ וְנַעֲבוֹד עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה:
"Seduction to Idolatry" refers to one individual seducing another to idolatry. One might tell the other that there is an object of reverence in such-and-such a place, which eats thus, drinks thus, causes such-and-such benefits or such-and-such harm. No entrapment is allowed for any capital offence except this one. If someone speaks thus to two people and they become his prosecuting witnesses, they must bring him to court and he will be stoned to death. If he spoke thus to only one person that person should say that he has friends who would also like to hear. The seducer may use guile and say that he cannot speak before them; then witnesses may be set behind a fence. He should ask the seducer to repeat privately what he had previously told him, and the seducer does so. The person being seduced must then say to him, "How can we forsake God in Heaven to go an worship stocks and stones?" If the seducer desists, well and good; if he says, "But we must, it is our duty, it is right for us" – then those waiting behind the fence must bring him to court and he is to be stoned to death. [Expressions of seduction include] someone saying I'll worship or I'll go and worship or let's go and worship. [The terms used in place of "worship" may be] sacrifice, offer incense, offer a libation, prostrate… The other kind of seducer to idolatry is one who says "Let's go and practice idolatry".
EXPLANATIONS:
1: The basis of our mishnah is in the Torah [Deuteronomy 13:7-12] (which by coincidence is part of this week's Torah Reading):
If your brother, even the son of your mother or father, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or your dearest friend seduce you secretly saying, "Let's go and worship other gods" – gods that you and your ancestors have never known, gods of the peoples around you, near or far, to the uttermost ends of the earth – you may not consent nor listen to him. You may not pity him or cover up for him: you must kill him. It is your own hand that shall be the first to kill him and the rest of the people shall follow: you shall stone him to death, for he seeks to seduce you away from the God who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of that slave-pen. All Israel shall hear of it and fear, and never again shall such an evil deed be done among you.
2:
Our long mishnah breaks down into three sections [Reisha, Emtzaïta and Seifa]. The Reisha defines what Seduction to Idolatry consists of: one person recommending to another the benefits to be accrued from the worship of some object of reverence of other. (Our mishnah specifically uses the term "object of reverence" and not the term "idol". Today that could include a multitude of evils!) However, according to the general laws of evidence as we have learned them up to now, what "one person says to another" is not evidence that is acceptable in court, since there must be two witnesses (and I believe that neither of them may be one of the principles). This naturally leads on to the Emtzaïta. 3:
He should ask the seducer to repeat privately what he had previously told him, and the seducer does so. The person being seduced must then say to him, "How can we forsake God in Heaven to go an worship stocks and stones?" If the seducer desists, well and good
and there the case ends!
4:
The phrase in our mishnah "I'll worship or I'll go and worship or let's go and worship" means that in modern English the seducer might say something like "I think it would be a good idea for me to go and …." or "Right now I feel like going and …" and so forth. Alternatively, he might make a direct appeal, "Let us go and…" including the victim in the invitation. The main acts of idolatry are enumerated: sacrifice, offering incense, offering a libation (of water or wine) and prostration. This, presumably, is intended to exclude a tourist "just visiting" out of curiosity. DISCUSSION:
Richard Friedman writes:
The mishna says that a man who has intercourse with a n'ara b'tula (an affianced virgin girl) is liable for stoning, and if a second man has intercourse with her, he's liable for strangulation. You explained that the reason for the different punishment for the second man is that the girl is no longer a virgin. You then said, "Thus all cases of illicit copulation with a woman apart from that described by our mishnah fall into this category [offenses punishable by strangulation]: the rape of a minor, the rape of an unmarried woman, the rape of a woman who was no longer a virgin, adultery and so forth." I understand this is true for adultery. However, I did not think that rape per se (other than the n'ara b'tula) was a capital offense under halacha. Isn't this what Deut. 22:28-29 discusses? I respond: Richard is technically correct: only the rape of a minor or a married woman is a capital offence (and the rape of a minor only because of the majority opinion of the sages in their elaboration of the mishnah under discussion). Instead of encapsulating, I bring an extensive quotation from our shiur in Sanhedrin 004:
The Torah, in Deuteronomy 22, distinguishes between two kinds of sexual relationship between and man and a woman outside the marriage bond: rape and seduction… Verses 28-29 of that chapter deal with the rape of an unmarried woman. (The rabbinic expansion [Yevamot 59a] would exclude from the above definition widows and divorcees, because verse 29 stipulates that the fine imposed must be paid to the victim's father, and not to the victim herself.) The law provides that if a man forces himself sexually on an unmarried woman he must indemnify the woman's father with a stipulated monetary payment; furthermore, his relationship to the woman is recognized as marriage and it is indissoluble by divorce.
Obviously, this statement of the Torah reflects certain presumptions about the status of such a woman in her society. First of all it assumes that the woman is "spoiled goods" on the marriage market; and that the main sufferer in the event of her being raped is her father (!), since her "value" to a prospective husband has been viciously curtailed. The second presumption is that a woman in such a predicament would want to be married to her assailant (!) so that she would not be left a solitary spinster for the rest of her life. This latter presumption is reflected in the observation of the Amora from Eretz-Israel, Rabbi Shim'on ben-Lakish [Yevamot 118b] that a woman would prefer to live with "a heap of woe" [an inappropriate husband] than to remain in perpetual spinsterhood [Tav lemeitav tandu milemeitav armelu]. Given the economic and social verities of those times, one can understand why a woman would feel that her economic security was more important than her personal happiness. According to our mishnah, cases which involve a charge of rape are to be heard by a court of three because of the monetary fine to be paid over by the assailant to the woman's father. It is not within the framework of our present study to go into the later development of this legislation in great detail, but later rabbinic interpretation obviously changed it a great deal. I shall make do with a direct quotation from Mishnah Ketubot 3:4. The seducer must indemnify on three counts, whereas the rapist must indemnify on four counts. The seducer must pay for "shame", for "spoilage" and he must pay the monetary fine [stipulated by the Torah]. In addition to these, the rapist must indemnify for "pain suffered". Thus the rapist is required to indemnify his victim by paying out a sum of money to be assessed by the court of three on each of the counts. (Shame refers to the the sense of outrage and indignity suffered. The Mishnah [Bava Kamma 8:1] makes it clear that this is very subjective: "it is all relative to the shamer and the shamed".) Perhaps it is interesting to note the method of assessing "pain suffered" that is described in that same mishnah (which deals with all cases in which one party is being sued by another for damages to his or her person). The mishnah says that the judges must assess how much money a "normal" person could be expected to be paid for voluntarily undergoing the suffering in question.
Thus far our explanation in Sanhedrin 004.
Shabbat Shalom to everybody. |