(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf

Sanhedrin 62

SANHEDRIN 62 - has been dedicated by Family Posen of Jerusalem & London to honor the Yahrzeit on 3 Kislev of their father, Reb Moshe ben Yehoshua (Frank) Posen Z"L, who completed Shas learning Dafyomi. He insisted on continuing with his Kevi'us until his very last day.



(a) When Rebbi Zakai quoted a Beraisa 'Zivach, Kiter, Nisah ve'Hishtachavah be'He'elam Echad, Eino Chayav Ela Echad', Rebbi Yochanan responded - by instructing him to take his Beraisa outside and learn it there.

(b) According to Rebbi Aba, Rebbi Zakai's Beraisa is a matter of a Machlokes Tana'im in another Beraisa, where Rebbi Yossi learns 'Hav'arah le'La'av Yatzas' - by which he means that the Torah inserts "Lo Seva'aru Eish" in Parshas Pikudei, to reduce the punishment of someone who kindles a fire on Shabbos to Malkos (whereas all other Melachos are subject to Kareis and even to Sekilah.

(c) Rebbi Nasan holds 'Hav'arah le'Chalek Yatzas'. Despite the fact that the Torah mentions only Hav'arah, we will extend this to each of the other Melachos - by applying the principle 'Davar she'Hayah bi'Ch'lal, ve'Yatza min ha'Kelal Le'lamed, Lo Le'lamed al Atzmo Yatza Ela Le'lamed al ha'Kelal Kulo Yatza' (When the Torah singles out a detail from the general rule for special treatment, then that treatment extends to the entire rule).

(d) The author of Rebbi Zakai's Beraisa will then be - Rebbi Yossi. Note, that according to Rebbi Yossi, Hishtachavayah ought not to be in the Beraisa (as we will point out later), since (even though it is subject to Sekilah) it is not subject to Kareis or to a Korban Chatas.

(a) Rav Yosef queries this however. It may well be that it is specifically by Shabbos that Rebbi Yossi learns 'Hav'arah le'La'av Yatzas' - because he specifically learns Chiluk Melachos there from another source, as we shall now see (in other words, he agrees on principle with the concept of 'Chiluk Melachos').

(b) In the Parshah of Chatas, the Torah writes "ve'Asah me'Achas me'Heinah". The Torah could have written in brief - either "Achas" or "Heinah", leaving us with four D'rashos, all pertaining to Shabbos "me'Achas", "me'Heinah", 'Achas sh'Hi Heinah', and 'Heinah she'Hi Achas'.

(c) Explaining Rebbi Yossi, Rebbi Yonasan interprets ...

1. ... ''me'Achas" (assuming that "Achas" refers to a complete Melachah such as writing the name 'Shimon) - to include someone who means to write Shimon, but ends up writing only 'Shem' (which is in itself, a complete word).
2. ... "me'Heinah" (assuming that "Heinah" refers to an Av Melachah) - to include someone who transgresses a Toldah, who will receive the same punishment as someone who transgresses an Av.
(d) And if 'Achas she'Hi Heinah' refers to Zadon Shabbos ve'Shigegas Melachos (for which one has to bring a Korban for each Melachah), 'Heinah she'Hi Achas' refers to - Zadon Melachos ve'Shigegas Melachos, for which one brings only one Korban.
(a) Rav Yosef's Kashya will explain why Rebbi Yochanan told Rebbi Zakai to take his Beraisa outside - inasmuch as even Rebbi Yossi will then agree to Chiluk Avodos by Avodah-Zarah (from Hishtachavayah).

(b) And we query Rav Yosef's observation on the grounds - that "me'Achas me'Heinah" is not speaking about Shabbos, but about Korban Chatas, in which case, it will apply equally to Avodah-Zarah as to Shabbos.

(c) This will not signify however, that Rebbi Zakai's Beraisa is be justified - because Rebbi Yossi will still concede to Chiluk Avodos from "me'Achas me'Heinah" (as opposed to learning it from Hishtachavayah.

(a) We suggest that "Achas" refers to the cutting of the animal's two pipes, and "me'Achas" includes the cutting of one, which the Torah considers a Shechitah here because in spite of the fact that it is not a Kasher Shechitah by a Chatas Beheimah - it is Kasher with regard to the Melikah of a Chatas ha'Of (a type of precedent which is often followed in the realm of Kodshim).

(b) If "Heinah" refers to the Avos (such as Zivu'ach, Kitur, Nisuch and Hishtachavayah), "me'Heinah" refers to Toldos - such as breaking a stick in front of the Avodah-Zarah (assuming that this was the way that the Avodah-Zarah was worshipped), which is similar to Shechitah.

(c) And if 'Achas she'Hi Heinah' refers to Zadon Avodas-Kochavim and Shigegas Avodos (Chiluk Avodos) 'Heinah she'Hi Achas' - refers to Zadon Avodos and Shigegas Avodas-Kochavim.

(d) This latter case cannot be speaking about a case where the sinner prostrated himself before a Shul or before an idol (as we explained earlier). We will establish it, according to ...

1. ... Abaye - by someone who did so me'Ahavah u'mi'Yir'ah.
2. ... Rava - by Omer Mutar (as we explained earlier).
(a) Rava himself once asked Rav Nachman whether 'He'elam Zeh ve'Zeh be'Yado' (where one forgot both Avodas-Kochavim at large and the Avodos) is Chayav a Chatas or Patur.

(b) We can indeed learn from Rava's current explanation - that he is Patur, thereby resolving the She'eilah.

(c) We finally refute the suggestion that the Pesukim "me'Achas me'Heinah" can possible be speaking about Avodah-Zarah - on the basis of what we learned earlier, that a Kohen Gadol's Chatas for Avodah-Zarah consists of a she-goat (like everybody else), whereas in that Parshah (which deals with a regular Chatas), the Torah obligates him to bring a bull (and a Nasi, a he-goat), as opposed to everyone else's she-goat.

(d) Having finally learned Chiluk Avodos by Avodah-Zarah from Hishtachavayah like Rav Yosef - does not mean that Rebbi Zakai's Beraisa is proved wrong - since we will later cite the Pasuk "Lo Sa'avdem" to substantiate it.




(a) According to Rav Shmuel bar Yehudah, the Beraisa that Rebbi Zakai cited in front of Rebbi Yochanan was quite different than the one we cited earlier. The Chumra that the Tana there ascribes to Shabbos over other Mitzvos is - that if someone transgresses twice in one He'elam, he is Chayav two Korbanos, whereas by other Mitzvos, he is Chayav only one.

(b) And he says that - whereas someone who was 'Shagag be'Lo Miskaven' by other Mitzvos is Chayav, by Shabbos, he is Patur.

(c) The problem with the Reisha, if we assume that the Tana is speaking about a case of ...

1. ... someone who reaped and ground in one He'elam on Shabbos is - that in the equivalent case by other Mitzvos (such as someone who ate Cheilev and blood in one He'elam), he would also be Chayav to bring two Korbanos.
2. ... someone who ate Cheilev twice in one He'elam (even on two different days) is - that in the equivalent case by Shabbos (if someone reaped twice in one He'elam), he would also be Chayav only one Korban Chatas.
(d) We Initially think that this is why Rebbi Yochanan instructed Rebbi Zakai to take the Beraisa outside. We resolve Rebbi Zakai however, by establishing the Beraisa by 'Ketzirah u'Techinah', whereas the equivalent case by other Mitzvos speaks by Avodah-Zarah, according to Rebbi Ami, who rules - 'Zivach ve'Kitar ve'Nisach be'He'elam Echad, Eino Chayav Ela Achas'.
(a) We cannot establish the Seifa, which obligates 'Shagag be'Lo Miskaven' by Avodas-Kochavim, because we have difficulty is establishing the case (in the same way as we discussed earlier). We could establish it by Ahavah and Yir'ah according to Abaye. The problem in establishing it by 'Omer Mutar', according to Rava - lies in the words 'Mah she'Ein Kein be'Shabbos' (bearing in mind Rava's She'eilah 'He'elam Zeh ve'Zeh be'Yado Mahu' [that we quoted earlier], where Rava was asking Rav Nachman whether the perpetrator is Chayav one Chatas or two, but he is certainly not Patur).

(b) We will establish 'Shagag be'Lo Miskaven' (Mis'asek) by other Mitzvos - where someone mistakes a piece of Cheilev for spit and swallows it, or where he mistakes his sister for his wife, and has relations with her.

(c) The equivalent case by Shabbos will be - where he intends to pick up what he believes to be a detached vegetable, which is in fact attached, and which he actually detaches as he picks it up.

(a) The Chiyuv of Mis'asek by Chalavim va'Arayos is based on a statement of Rav Nachman Amar Shmuel - who obligates them to bring a Chatas because he derived benefit from them (and it is as if he performed the act intentionally, turning him into a Shogeg).

(b) Mis'asek is Patur by Shabbos - because Shabbos requires 'Meleches Machsheves', which means that he means to perform the act that he actually performs.

(c) Even though it is possible to establish the Reisha of Rebbi Zakai's Beraisa by Avodas-Kochavim, and the Seifa by other Mitzvos, Rebbi Yochanan instructed Rebbi Zakai to take the Beraisa outside - because he does not like establishing the Reisha and the Seifa in two different ways (or like two different Tana'im).

(d) With regard to establishing the Reisha of the Mishnah in Perek Hamafkid like Rebbi Yishmael, and the Seifa, like Rebbi Akiva, Rebbi Yochanan declared - that he would carry the clothes of anyone who would establish the Reisha and the Seifa according to one Tana, to the bathhouse (generally something that slaves would do).

Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,