POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
Prepared by Rabbi P. Feldman
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question on the daf
Previous daf Sanhedrin 66
1) WHEN IS ONE CHAYAV SEKILAH FOR SHABBOS?
(a) (Mishnah): If one desecrates Shabbos by something which
is Chayav Kares (for Mezid) and Chayav Korban b'Shogeg
(if he was Mezid and warned, he is Chayav Misah).
2) CURSING A PARENT
(b) (Gemara) Question: This implies that there is a
desecration of Shabbos which is not Chayav Korban or
Kares - what is it?
(c) Answer #1: According to R. Akiva, it is forbidden
mid'Oraisa to leave the Techum (2000 Amos around the
city) on Shabbos, this is not Chayav Korban or Kares;
(d) Answer #2: According to R. Yosi, burning on Shabbos is
only a Lav.
(a) (Mishnah): One is liable for cursing his father and
mother only if he curses with Hash-m's name;
(b) R. Meir says, if he cursed with a Kinuy he is liable;
(c) Chachamim say, he is exempt.
(d) (Gemara) Question: Who are the Chachamim that exempt?
(e) Answer: It is R. Menachem b'Rebbi Yosi.
1. (Beraisa - R. Menachem b'Rebbi Yosi) Question:
"B'Nokvo *Shem* Yumas" - what does this teach?
(f) (Beraisa): "Ish Ish" - this includes a daughter, Tumtum
(someone of unknown gender, his genitals are covered)
and Androginus (someone who has male and female genitals);
2. Answer: One is liable for cursing a parent only if
he used Hash-m's name.
1. Question (R. Yoshiyah): "Asher Yekalel Es Aviv v'Es
Imo" only teaches if he curses both, how do we know
if he curses only one of them?
(g) "Mos Yumas" - by stoning.
2. Answer (R. Yoshiyah): "Aviv v'Imo Kilel" - cursing
is written next to the mother (as well as next to
the father) to teach that he is liable even if he
curses only one of them.
3. R. Yonason says, "Aviv *v*'Es Imo", the 'Vov' (and)
connotes even one, unless the Torah explicitly says
'together' (as it does regarding Kilayim).
(h) Suggestion: Perhaps it is a different Misas Beis Din!
(i) Rejection: It says here "Damav Bo", it says regarding Ov
and Yid'oni "Demeihem Bam" - there (it explicitly says
that) it means stoning, also here.
(j) Question: This teaches the punishment - what Lav forbids
(k) Answer: If his father was a judge, he transgresses
"Elokim Lo Sekalel";
1. If his father was a Nasi (king), he transgresses
"V'Nasi v'Amcha Lo Sa'or";
(l) Question: If his father was neither a judge nor a Nasi,
what is the source?
(m) Answer #1: We learn from a Binyan Av (precedent) from
both of them:
1. Each has its own stringency - we are commanded to
follow the rulings of a judge, not of a Nasi;
(n) Objection: It is forbidden to curse a judge or a Nasi
because of their greatness, this does not apply to one's
2. We are commanded not to rebel against a Nasi, not
against a judge.
3. The Tzad ha'Shavah of them is that they act like
someone of your nation, we are commanded not to
curse them - also one's father, it is forbidden to
(o) Answer #2: "Lo Sekalel Cheresh" - just like it is
forbidden to curse a deaf person, also one's father.
1. Question: It is forbidden to curse him because he is
deaf, this does not apply to one's father!
(p) Answer #3: The Torah could have omitted Nasi or a judge
(it could be learned from the other two), we use it to
teach about one's father.
2. Answer: We learn from a Nasi and a judge that
deafness is not the criteria.
3. Question: We cannot learn from a judge or a Nasi,
their greatness causes the prohibition to curse
4. Answer: Each has its own stringency, we learn from
the Tzad ha'Shavah of them - they act like someone
of your nation, we are commanded not to curse them -
the same applies to one's father.
5. Objection: We cannot learn from these, each of them
1. Question: This is according to the opinion that
"Elohim Lo Sekalel" refers to a judge;
i. According to the opinion that it refers to
Hash-m (and forbids blasphemy), how can we
2. Answer: We must say, R. Yishmael learns the
prohibition of blasphemy from cursing a judge (there
is no other source);
ii. (Beraisa - R. Yishmael): "Elohim Lo Sekalel"
refers to a judge;
iii. R. Akiva says, it refers to Hash-m.
iv. (Beraisa - R. Eliezer ben Yakov): "Elokim Lo
Sekalel" forbids blasphemy.
i. Likewise, R. Akiva learns the prohibition of
cursing a judge from blasphemy!
3. Question: We understand R. Yishmael (the Torah
refers to a judge as 'Elokim' to teach that it also
applies to Hash-m) - but according to R. Akiva,
perhaps there is no prohibition of cursing a judge!
4. Answer: If so, it should say 'Elokim Lo Sekal';
i. Rather, it says "Sekalel" to teach that it also
forbids cursing a judge.
3) STONING FOR RELATIONS WITH A "NA'ARAH ME'ORASAH"
(a) (Mishnah): One is not stoned for relations with a Na'arah
Me'orasah, Ad (unless) she is a Na'arah, a virgin,
Mekudeshes, and in her father's house;
4) BURNING A "BAS KOHEN"
(b) If two men had relations with her, the first is stoned,
the second is choked.
(c) (Gemara - Beraisa): "Na'arah" - this excludes a Bogeres;
"Besulah" - this excludes a non-virgin; "Me'orasah" -
this excludes a Nesu'ah; "Beis Avihah"; - this excludes
the case when her father's messengers handed her over to
her husband's (to take her for Chupah).
(d) (Rav Yehudah): Our Mishnah is like R. Meir, but Chachamim
say that "Na'arah" includes a minor.
(e) Question (Rav Acha mi'Difti): Perhaps the Mishnah is like
Chachamim - 'unless she is a Na'arah' excludes a Bogeres!
(f) Answer (Ravina): If so, it should say 'one is liable
*only for* a Na'arah, a virgin, Mekudeshes, and in her
1. Rather, it says '*Ad (until)* she is a Na'arah...'
to exclude a minor.
(g) Question (R. Yakov bar Ada): According to R. Meir, if one
had relations with a Mekudeshes minor, what is the law?
2. This cannot be refuted,
1. Does the Parshah totally exclude (relations with) a
minor (he is exempt), or does it apply to a minor,
except for stoning?
(h) Answer (Rav): Presumably, it applies, except for stoning
(he is choked).
(i) Question: But it says "U'Mesu Gam Shneihem" - they must
be alike (i.e. both are adults and are Chayav Misah - if
not, neither is killed)!
(j) Rav was silent.
(k) Question (Shmuel): Rav should have answered "U'Mes ha'Ish
Asher Shachav Imah Levado"!
(l) Answer: Tana'im argue as Rav and Shmuel do.
1. (Beraisa - R. Yoshiyah): "U'Mesu Gam Shneihem" -
only if they are alike;
(m) Question: What does R. Yonason learn from "U'Mesu Gam
2. R. Yonason says, U'Mes ha'Ish...Levado" (if she is a
(n) Answer (Rava): This excludes acts of Chidudim (he touches
the Ever to other parts of her body - she does not get
much pleasure from this, surely she is exempt), the verse
teaches that (also) he is exempt.
1. R. Yoshiyah does not need a verse to teach this,
obviously, one is not liable for it.
(o) Question: What does R. Yoshiyah learn from "U'Mes
(p) Answer: He learns Rebbi's law.
1. (Beraisa): If 10 men had relations with a Na'arah
Me'orasah, and she is still a virgin (e.g. they had
unnatural relations), all are stoned;
2. Rebbi says, the first is stoned, the others are
(a) (Beraisa - Rebbi): "U'Vas Ish Kohen Ki Sechel Liznos" -
the beginning (this will be explained);
1. Support: "U'Mes ha'Ish Asher Shachav Imah Levado".
(b) Question: What does Rebbi teach?
(c) Answer (Rav Huna brei d'Rav Yehoshua): Rebbi holds like
R. Yishmael, who says that an Arusah is burned, not a
1. "...Ki Sechel Liznos" teaches that if her first
relations were adultery, she is burned; if she had
relations before this, she is choked.
(d) Question: What support did he bring for himself from
(e) Answer: Just as there, the verse discusses her first
relations, also here.
(f) (Rav Bivi bar Abaye): Rav Yosef explained that Rebbi
holds like R. Meir, who says that (a Nesu'ah is also
burned, but) if she married a Pasul (someone forbidden to
marry a Bas Yisrael), she is choked for adultery.
1. "...Ki Sechel Liznos" teaches that if her first
Chilul (defilement) was adultery, she is burned; if
not, she is choked.
(g) Question: What support did he bring for himself from
(h) Answer: That verse gives a special law (stoning) for
first relations (of a Na'arah Me'orasah); similarly, our
verse gives a special law (burning) for her first Chilul.