סנהדרין  פרק  רביעי   אחד דיני ממונות  ( לה: )       Sanhedrin 35b  ❃

ושמע שמת לו מת, יכול יטמא - אמרת לא יטמא.

יכול כשם שאינו מטמא לאחותו כך אינו מטמא למת מצוה - תלמוד לומר ולאחתו - לאחותו הוא דאינו מטמא, אבל מטמא למת מצוה.

שבת שנידחת מפני עבודה אינו דין שתהא קבורת מת מצוה דוחה אותה?

אמר ליה: רציחה תוכיח, שדוחה את העבודה ואינה דוחה את השבת.

- רציחה גופה תדחה את השבת מקל וחומר: מה עבודה שדוחה את השבת רציחה דוחה אותה, שנאמר (שמות כ"א) מעם מזבחי תקחנו למות, שבת שנידחת מפני עבודה - אינו דין שתהא רציחה דוחה אותה?

- אמר רבא: כבר פסקה תנא דבי רבי ישמעאל, דתנא דבי רבי ישמעאל: (שמות ל"ה) לא תבערו אש, מה תלמוד לומר?

- מה תלמוד לומר?

אי לרבי יוסי - ללאו יצאת, אי לרבי נתן - לחלק יצאת - כדתניא: הבערה ללאו יצאת, דברי רבי יוסי.

רבי נתן אומר: לחלק יצאת.

אלא אמר רבא: תנא משבות קשיא ליה: מושבות מה תלמוד לומר?

מכדי שבת חובת הגוף היא, וחובת הגוף נוהגת בין בארץ בין בחוץ לארץ, (שמות ל"ה) מושבות, דכתב רחמנא למה לי?

משום רבי ישמעאל אמר תלמיד אחד: לפי שנאמר (דברים כ"א) כי יהיה באיש חטא משפט מות והומת, שומע אני בין בחול בין בשבת, והא מה אני מקיים (שמות ל"א) מחלליה מות יומת - בשאר מלאכות, חוץ ממיתת בין דין.

או אינו אלא אפילו מיתת בית דין.

ומה אני מקיים והומת - בחול אבל לא בשבת.

או אינו אלא אפילו בשבת?

תלמוד לומר לא תבערו אש בכל משבתיכם, ולהלן הוא אומר (במדבר ל"ה) והיו אלה לכם לחקת משפט לדרתיכם בכל מושבתיכם, מה מושבות האמור להלן - בית דין, אף מושבות האמור כאן - בית דין.

ואמר רחמנא לא תבערו אש בכל משבתיכם.

אמר אביי: השתא דאמרת אין רציחה דוחה את השבת - אין רציחה דוחה את העבודה מקל וחומר ומה שבת שנידחית מפני העבודה - אין רציחה דוחה אותה, עבודה שהיא דוחה את השבת - אינו דין שלא תהא רציחה דוחה אותה?

- אלא הא דכתיב מעם מזבחי תקחנו למות - ההוא לקרבן יחיד, דלא דחי שבת.

- אמר רבא: (אי הכי) לא תהא רציחה דוחה קרבן יחיד מקל וחומר,


and he heard that one of his relatives had died, it might be thought that he should defile himself, but in fact the law(1) provides that he should not.

Now, it might be thought that just as he may not defile himself for his sister, so may he not defile himself for a Meth-Mizwah: therefore Scripture states, And to his sister, i.e., [only] for his sister may he not defile himself, but he must do so for a Meth-Mizwah.)

Then the Sabbath, which is abrogated in favour of the Temple service, should surely be set aside for the burial of a Meth-Mizwah! - He answered: Execution(2) can prove it [sc. the contrary]: it supersedes the Temple service,(3) and yet does not set aside the Sabbath.(4)

But let execution itself supersede the Sabbath, arguing [likewise] a minori: If the Temple service, which supersedes the Sabbath, is itself set aside for execution, as it is written Thou shalt take him(5) from mine altar that he may die:(6) then the Sabbath, which the Temple service sets aside, should surely be set aside by execution! - Said Raba: A Tanna of R`Ishmael's School has already decided this, for a Tanna of the school of R`Ishmael taught: Ye shall not kindle a fire:(7) What does this teach?(8) 'What does this teach? ' [askest thou]! According to R`Jose, [it is particularized] in order to constit it merely a prohibitory command;(9) according to R`Nathan in order to teach separation,(10) as has been taught: The [singling out of] kindling is to shew that it is subject merely to a negative command: this is the view of R`Jose.

R`Nathan said: It is to teach separation.

But, said Raba, the Tanna's difficulty is [the word] 'habitations'.(11)

Why is the word 'habitations'(12) stated?

For consider: [the observance of the] Sabbath is a personal duty,(13) and a personal duty is obligatory both within and without the Land [sc. Palestine]; what then is the purpose of 'habitations', which the Divine Law wrote? - A disciple said on R`Ishmael's authority: Since it is written, And if a man have committed a sin worthy of death and he be put o death,(14) I [might] understand it to mean both on week-days and on the Sabbath.(15)

How then should I interpret, He that profaneth it shall surely be put to death?(16) - As referring to other forms of work, but not judicial execution.

Or perhaps that is not so, and it does indeed include execution by the Beth din; and how an I to interpret, And he be put to death? - as applying only to week-days, but not to the Sabbath!(17) Or perhaps, on the contrary, even the Sabbath is meant?(18) - Therefore(19) Scripture states: Ye shall not kindle a fire throughout your habitations,(20) and elsewhere it says And these things shall be for a statute of judgment for you throughout your generations in all your habitations:(21) Just as the word 'habitations' found there,(22) refers to [matters concerning] a Beth din, so the word 'habitations' found here refers to [work entailed by a] Beth din.(23)

And regarding it the Divine Law states: Ye shall not kindle a fire in all your habitations.(24)

Abaye said: Now that you have concluded that execution does not supersede the Sabbath, it [necessarily] follows that execution does not suspend the Temple service, a minori: If the Sabbath, which is abrogated in favour of the Temple service, is not set aside for execution; then the Temple service, which supersedes the Sabbath, is surely not suspended by execution! And as to the Scriptural verse, Thou shalt take him from mine altar that he may die?(25) - this refers only to a private sacrifice,(26) which does not suspend the Sabbath.(27)

Raba said:(28) But execution should not suspend [attendance even upon] a private sacrifice, a minori:


(1) In the verse under discussion; v. n. 6.

(2) Lit., 'Murder'.

(3) If a priest is convicted of murder; he must be executed, even if he wishes to perform the Temple service.

(4) As was stated above.

(5) The murderer.

(6) Ex. XXI, 14.

(7) Ex. XXXV, 3.

(8) I.e., why was the kindling of fire specially mentioned; surely it was already included in: Ye shall not do any work! (Ex. XX, 10.)

(9) I.e., its infringement is punishable only by lashes and not by stoning, as is the performance of other work on the Sabbath.

(10) I.e., to teach that each transgression of the Sabbath laws is to be atoned for separately. This interpretation is based on the eighth of the thirteen exegetical principles expounded by R. Ishmael, namely: If anything is included in a general proposition and is then made the subject of a special statement, that which is predicated of it is not to be understood as limited to itself alone, but applies to the whole of the general proposition.

(11) Ex. XXXV, 3.

(12) Which word, as a rule, indicates that the law is confined to Palestine alone.

(13) As opposed to laws dependent on the soil, such as those of the Sabbatical year, or the fruits of the soil, such as tithes etc.

(14) Deut. XXI, 22.

(15) Since, by reason of the a minori argument propounded above, execution might supersede the Sabbath.

(16) Ex. XXXI, 14.

(17) Since the argument a minori can be refuted by the fact that the burial of a Meth-Mizwah does not suspend the Sabbath laws even thought it sets aside the Temple service.

(18) I.e., execution might nevertheless supersede the Sabbath, a minori, as above. Nor is the refutation stated in the last note a valid one, since the same reasoning may be used to show that the burial of a Meth-Mizwah too should be permissible on the Sabbath.

(19) I.e., in order to clarify the position.

(20) Ex. XXXV, 3.

(21) Num. XXXV, 29.

(22) With reference to the manslayer and court executions.

(23) I.e., execution.

(24) Even such fire as is involved in execution by burning, ordered by a Beth din. This execution cannot suspend the Sabbath laws, in spite of the argument a minori. This fact too refutes the argument by which it was sought to prove that the burial of a Meth-Mizwah should abrogate the Sabbath.

(25) Ex. XXI, 14, which conflicts with this conclusion.

(26) I.e., when a priest accused of murder officiates at an offering brought by an individual.

(27) Execution therefore supersedes it. But if he is engaged in offering a public sacrifice, execution may not set it aside, by the preceding argument.

(28) Raba disagrees with Abaye, and proceeds to demonstrate the incorrectness of Abaye's view by an argument somewhat similar to a reductio ad absurdum.