(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 71


(a) What does our Mishnah say about a ben Sorer u'Moreh who steals either from his father and eats in his father's domain or who steals from others and eats either in their domain or in that of his father?

(b) When then, will he be Chayav?

(c) Why is he Patur in a case where he steals ...

  1. ... from his father and eats in his father's domain?
  2. ... from others and eats in their domain?
  3. ... from others and eats in his father's domain?
(d) Why is he then Chayav if he steals from his father's domain and eats it in the domain of others?
(a) Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Yehudah requires the ben Sorer u'Moreh to steal from what belongs to his mother as well as to his father.
Bearing in mind that whatever his mother owns belongs to his father, how does Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Chanina explain this?

(b) How do we amend this in view of Rebbi Chanan bar Moldah, who requires the ben Sorer u'Moreh to steal money with which he buys meat and wine?

(c) How do we finally establish the case even where the money actually belongs to his mother.
How is that possible?

(a) What does our Mishnah say about a case where either the ben Sorer u'Moreh's father or mother declines to hand him over to Beis-Din?

(b) Rebbi Yehudah requires the ben Sorer u'Moreh's mother to be fit for his father.
On what grounds do we reject the suggestion that she is forbidden to him because she is a Chayvei K'riysus?

(c) What then, does Rebbi Yehudah mean?

(d) How does he derive this from the Pasuk "Einenu Shome'a be'Koleinu"?

(a) Why do we assume the author of the Beraisa which says 'ben Sorer u'Moreh Lo Hayah ve'Lo Asid Liheyos', to be Rebbi Yehudah?

(b) Alternatively, we establish the Beraisa like Rebbi Shimon.
What does Rebbi Shimon say about a boy who eats a Tartimar of meat and drinks half a log of wine?

(c) If a ben Sorer u'Moreh will never happen, why did the Torah write it?

(d) What did Rebbi Yonasan testify?

(a) And we establish the Beraisa which says 'Ir ha'Nidachas Lo Haysah ve'Lo Asidah Liheyos' like Rebbi Eliezer.
What does Rebbi Eliezer say about as little as one solitary Mezuzah? Is this Din confined to a Mezuzah as opposed to other Sefarim?

(b) How does he derive this from the Pasuk in Shoftim "ve'es Kol Shelalah Tikbotz ... ve'Sarafta"?

(c) Is the above Beraisa unanimous?

(d) Which is the third Parshah about which the Beraisa says 'Lo Hayah ve'Lo Asid Liheyos'?

(a) We establish this Beraisa like Rebbi Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon.
What does he say about the Shiur, the bricks and the walls of a Bayis ha'Menuga?

(b) From which two Pesukim (words) does Rebbi Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon learn this?

(c) What did Rebbi Eliezer b'Rebbi Tzadok mean when he referred to an area within the boundaries of Aza which was called 'Churvesa Segirta'?

(d) And what did Shimon Ish K'far Ako say about his visit to the Galil? What marked place was he referring to?

(a) What does our Mishnah learn from the Pasuk in Ki Seitzei ...
  1. ... "Ve'Safsu Bo Aviv ve'Imo"?
  2. ... "ve'Hotzi'u Oso"?
  3. ... "ve'Amru"?
  4. ... "Beneinu Zeh"?
  5. ... "Einenu Shome'a be'Koleinu"?
(b) What is the significance of the last ruling? Why will it not suffice that his parents later see that he disobeyed them?

(c) What does the Tana mean when he says that they warn their son in front of Beis-Din? Since when does a warning require three judges?

(d) What is then the significance of the warning? Why can it not be the warning which will lead to Malkos?

(a) We just learned that the parents warn their son in front of two witnesses.
What is the purpose of the witnesses?

(b) Should he contravene their warning, they bring him before a Beis-Din of twenty-three to be stoned.
What condition does our Mishnah still require before he can be sentenced to death?

(c) We cite Rebbi Avahu, who learns two 'Gezeirah-Shavos' (all in Ki Seitzei).
What does he learn from ...

  1. ... "*ben* Sorer u'Moreh" from "ve'Hayah im *Bin* Hakos ha'Rasha"?
  2. ... "ve'Lakchu Ziknei ha'Ir es ha'Ish ve'Yisru Oso" from "ve'Yisru Oso" (of ben Sorer u'Moreh)?
Answers to questions



(a) What will be the Din if the ben Sorer u'Moreh runs away and passes the maximum age limit ...
  1. ... before the final judgement has been passed?
  2. ... after the final judgement has been passed?
(b) What does Rebbi Chanina say about a ben No'ach who cursed Hashem and converted?

(c) What change occurred in his ...

  1. ... Din?
  2. ... manner of death?
(d) We initially try to support Rebbi Chanina from he Reisha of our Mishnah ('Barach ad she'Lo Nigmar Diyno ... Patur'), but we reject the proof from there. What advantage does the Nochri there have over and above the Ger of Rebbi Chanina?

(e) And how do we answer the Kashya on Rebbi Chanina from the Seifa of our Mishnah 've'Im mi'she'Nigmar Diyno Barach ... Chayav' (from which we see that a person remains Chayav even though his Din has changed)?

(a) What does the Beraisa say about a ben No'ach who killed ...
  1. ... a Nochri or who committed adultery with his wife and then converted?
  2. ... a Yisrael or who committed adultery with his wife and then converted?
(b) We see from here that even though the Din has changed, he remains Chayav.
Why is this not a Kashya on Rebbi Chanina?

(c) That's fine as far as a murderer is concerned, but surely the Din of Eishes Ish has changed (from Sayaf to Chenek), so why is he not Patur?

(d) On what grounds do we reject this answer?

(a) So we answer the initial Kashya by differentiating between this case and that of Rebbi Chanina, because (in this case) 'Kalah ba'Chamurah Meishach Shaycha'.
What does that mean?

(b) We query this answer however, on the grounds that it will not work out according to Rebbi Shimon.
Why not? What does Rebbi Shimon say about the order of deaths that leaves the Kashya intact?

(c) And we solve this problem by establishing Rebbi Shimon like Tana de'Bei Menasheh.
What does Tana de'Bei Menasheh say with regard to the death-sentence of a Nochri, that reconciles Rebbi Shimon with our answer?

(a) The Beraisa rules that if a Na'arah ha'Me'urasah commits adultery and (after the final ruling has been issued, she) becomes a Bogeres, she receives Chenek. What do we try to prove from this?

(b) We refute this proof however, on the basis of Rebbi Yochanan's statement to the Beraisa expert.
What amendment did he make to the Beraisa?

(c) According to Rebbi Yochanan then, what will be the Din in Rebbi Chanina's case, where a ben No'ach cursed Hashem and then converted?

(a) We have already quoted our Mishnah, that a ben Sorer u'Moreh is punished because of what he is going to do and not because of what he did. Why does the Tana go on to say that drinking wine and sleeping, and the death of ...
  1. ... Resha'im is beneficial both to themselves and to the world?
  2. ... Tzadikim is bad both for themselves and for the world?
(b) And on what basis does the Tana say that ...
  1. ... the scattering of Resha'im is beneficial both to them and to the world, whereas their banding together is bad?
  2. ... the scattering of Tzadikim is bad for them and for the world, whereas their banding together is beneficial to both?
(c) What is the last thing listed by the Tana that is bad for Tzadikim but good for Tzadikim?
Answers to questions

Next daf


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