(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 86


(a) What objection did Rav Sheishes raise when the Beraisa expert cited the above Beraisa 'Mochro le'Aviv ... Chayav? What does Rebbi Shimon learn from "me'Echav"?

(b) So how did he amend the Beraisa?

(c) We are all conversant with Rebbi Yochanan's statement 'S'tam Masnisin Rebbi Meir. He continues, 'S'tam Tosefta Rebbi Nechemyah'.
Who is S'tam Sifra?

(d) S'tam Sifri is Rebbi Shimon.
What is the difference between Sifra and Sifri?

(a) Who was the Rebbe of all the above-mentioned Tana'im?

(b) Based on what we just learned, why could Rav Sheishes not have answered the above discrepancy by establishing the Beraisa (discussing "Ki Yimatzei Ish Gonev Nefesh me'Echav") like the Rabbanan of Rebbi Shimon?

(a) The Rabbanan in our Mishnah exempt a father who kidnaps his son.
What objection does Rav Papa raise to Abaye's original D'rashah of "Ki Yimatzei", 'P'rat le'Matzuy'?

(b) What did he mean when he said 'K'gon Beis Peloni di'Shechichan Gabaihu'?
Why did he decline to mention their name?

(c) What did Abaye reply? If he did not learn it from "Ki Yimatzei", then from where *did* he learn it?

(d) What Halachah did Rava extrapolate from here in connection with Talmidim learning Chumash or Mishnah?

(a) How does Rebbi Yehudah extrapolate from the Pasuk in Ki Seitzei "Ki Yinatzu Anashim Yachdav Ish ve'Achiv" that 'Ein la'Avadim Boshes'?

(b) What is the Pasuk referring to?

(c) How do the Rabbanan refute Rebbi Yehudah's proof?

(a) With regard to the Parshah of kidnapping, how does Rebbi Yehudah (in our Mishnah) now Darshen ...
  1. ... "me'Echav"?
  2. ... "mi'B'nei Yisrael"?
(b) What do the Rabbanan say to Rebbi Yehudah's D'rashah from "me'Echav"?

(c) And how do they then Darshen "mi'B'nei Yisrael"?

(a) Rebbi Yashiyah learns the Azharah for Gonev Nefashos from "Lo Signov" (Yisro), and Rebbi Yochanan, from "Lo Yimachru Mimkeres Aved" (Behar).
If they argue, what is the basis of their Machlokes?

(b) What is the Beraisa's basis for interpreting ...

  1. ... "Lo Tignov" in the Asares ha'Dibros as an Azharah for Gonev Nefashos and not for Gonev Mamon?
  2. ... "Lo Tignovu" in Kedoshim as an Azharah for Gonev Mamon and not for Gonev Nefashos?
(a) Chizkiyah absolves both the Eidei Geneivah and the Eidei Mechirah (by Gonev Nefashos) from the Din of Zomemin, because he holds like Rebbi Akiva. What does Rebbi Akiva say, based on the Pasuk in Shoftim "al-Pi Shenayim Eidim Yakum Davar"?

(b) How does Chizkiyah apply the same principle to Gonev Nefashos?

(c) How will this Halachah affect the Din of the kidnapper himself?

(d) According to Chizkiyah, a kidnapper will receive the death sentence - only if it is one pair of witnesses who testify on the Geneivah and the Mechirah.

Answers to questions



(a) Rebbi Yochanan holds like the Rabbanan.
What do they say?

(b) On what grounds does Chizkiyah agree that the latter pair of witnesses in the case of a ben Sorer u'Moreh can become Zomemin?

(c) According to Rebbi Yochanan, witnesses who testified that Reuven kidnapped Shimon are subject to Miysah should they become Zomemin.
What is the case?

(a) Chizkiyah and Rebbi Yochanan argue over whether Eidei Geneivah alone are subject to Malkos. Why must Chizkiyah be the one who holds 'Lokin'?

(b) According to Rebbi Yochanan, will the witnesses receive Malkos, should the Eidei Mechirah not turn up?

(c) Actually, it is the kidnapper who is exempt from Malkos, seeing as he is subject to Miysah.
What does that have to do with the witnesses?

(d) Why are the witnesses not at least Chayav Malkos for "Lo Sa'aneh"?

(e) What Kashya does this prompt Rav Papa to ask on Chizkiyah himself, who just described the very same Eidei Geneivah as 'Chatzi Davar'?

(a) So Rav Papa shifts the Machlokes to the other foot.
What do both parties say with regard to the Eidei Mechirah?

(b) According to Chizkiyah however, the Eidei Geneivah are not subject to Miysah.
Why not?

(c) What does Rebbi Yochanan then say?

(d) And who is the one who concedes in the case of ben Sorer u'Moreh?

(a) Abaye made three statement.
What did he mean when he said that
  1. ... everybody agrees by ben Sorer u'Moreh (with regard to the first witnesses)?
  2. ... everybody agrees by ben Sorer u'Moreh (with regard to the last witnesses)?
  3. ... there is a Machlokes by ben Sorer u'Moreh? Which Machlokes was he referring to?
(b) What reason does Rav Asi give for his ruling 'Eidei Mechirah be'Nefesh she'Huzmu Ein Neheragin'?

(c) On what grounds does Abaye refute Rav Yosef, who establishes Rav Asi like Rebbi Akiva (who says 'Davar ve'Lo Chatzi Davar')?

(a) So how does Abaye establish Rav Asi?

(b) Bearing in mind that this would be no Chidush, how does Abaye establish the case?

(c) Considering that this too is obvious, how does he finally explain Rav Asi? What is the Chidush?

(a) What does our Mishnah learn from the Pasuk in Shoftim "Ki Yipalei Mimcha Davar la'Mishpat"?

(b) The first of the three Batei-Din in the vicinity of the Beis-Hamikdash sat at the entrance of the Har ha'Bayis (within the Chil, in front of the entrance to the Ezras Nashim).
Where did the other two sit?

(c) What was the procedure of a Zaken Mamrei?

(d) How does the Mishnah describe the Beis-Din ha'Gadol that sat in the Lishkas ha'Gazis?

(a) What distinction does the Mishnah draw between the first two Batei-Din and the Sanhedrin ha'Gadol?

(b) What does the Mishnah learn from the Pasuk (in connection with the Zaken Mamrei) "ve'ha'Ish Asher *Ya'aseh* be'Zadon"?

(c) What does the Tana finally say about a Talmid who behaved like a Zaken Mamrei?

(d) What does 'Nimtzo Chumro Kulo' mean?

Answers to questions

Next daf


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