How Executions Must be Minimal
Mishnah Makkos, Chapter 1, Page 1, Line 10 (Daf: Babylonian Talmud, Sefer Nezikin, Makkos, Chapter 2: Ellu Hen HaGolin, Page 7a, Lines 2-3:)
- A court that executes once in 7 years is characterised as “destructive”.
- Rabbi Elazar upped it to once in 70 years.
- Rabbi Tarfon and Rabbi Akiva said, if they were in the Sanhedrin, no one would have ever been executed.
מִי שֶׁנִּגְמַר דִּינוֹ וּבָרַח וּבָא לִפְנֵי אוֹתוֹ בֵית דִּין, אֵין סוֹתְרִים אֶת דִּינוֹ. כָּל מָקוֹם שֶׁיַּעַמְדוּ שְׁנַיִם וְיֹאמְרוּ, מְעִידִין אָנוּ בְאִישׁ פְּלוֹנִי שֶׁנִּגְמַר דִּינוֹ בְּבֵית דִּינוֹ שֶׁל פְּלוֹנִי, וּפְלוֹנִי וּפְלוֹנִי עֵדָיו, הֲרֵי זֶה יֵהָרֵג. סַנְהֶדְרִין נוֹהֶגֶת בָּאָרֶץ וּבְחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ. סַנְהֶדְרִין הַהוֹרֶגֶת אֶחָד בְּשָׁבוּעַ נִקְרֵאת חָבְלָנִית. רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה אוֹמֵר, אֶחָד לְשִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה. רַבִּי טַרְפוֹן וְרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמְרִים, אִלּוּ הָיִינוּ בַסַּנְהֶדְרִין לֹא נֶהֱרַג אָדָם מֵעוֹלָם. רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר, אַף הֵן מַרְבִּין שׁוֹפְכֵי דָמִים בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל:
This mishna continues to discuss the matter of testimony in the case of one who is liable to be executed. Concerning one whose verdict was delivered and he was sentenced to death and he fled, and he then came before the same court that sentenced him, they do not overturn his verdict and retry him. Rather, the court administers the previous verdict. Consequently, in any place where two witnesses will stand and say: We testify with regard to a man called so-and-so that his verdict was delivered and he was sentenced to death in the court of so-and-so, and so-and-so and so-and-so were his witnesses, that person shall be executed on the basis of that testimony. The mishna continues: The mitzva to establish a Sanhedrin with the authority to administer capital punishments is in effect both in Eretz Yisrael and outside Eretz Yisrael. A Sanhedrin that executes a transgressor once in seven years is characterized as a destructive tribunal. Since the Sanhedrin would subject the testimony to exacting scrutiny, it was extremely rare for a defendant to be executed. Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya says: This categorization applies to a Sanhedrin that executes a transgressor once in seventy years. Rabbi Tarfon and Rabbi Akiva say: If we had been members of the Sanhedrin, we would have conducted trials in a manner whereby no person would have ever been executed. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: In adopting that approach, they too would increase the number of murderers among the Jewish people. The death penalty would lose its deterrent value, as all potential murderers would know that no one is ever executed.
The Conditions of Execution
Mishneh Torah by Maimonaides, Sefer Shoftim (Judges), Sanhedrin, Page 12, Lines 1-3:
- A person has to first be warned of the punishment, whether he is Torah scholar or a common person, and he has to acknowledge it, and not just say that he knows there is a punishment. (Even if he says: “I know,” he is not liable for punishment until he accepts death upon himself, saying: “It is for this reason that I am doing this.” In such a situation, he is executed.)
- He must commit the crime directly after the warning, or else a warning should be issued again.
- It is because when you kill a person, you kill his entire descendants, and it is from this that it is derived that if you kill a soul, it’s as though you killed an entire world, and if you saved a soul, you saved and entire world.
- If all the witness testimonies are accurate, the person is informed that if he did not transgress, it is not necessary to fear their words, and is judged, and if there is grounds for acquittal, he is released. If not, he is incarcerated for a day.
- That day, the judges eat little and drink no wine, and debate the topic throughout the night, and then in the morning, presents all their updated opinions in the Beis Din (Rabbinical Court).
- All their rationales are recorded, and it is seen in the “drisha v’chakira” at the Beis Din (Rabbinical Court) if he can be acquitted, he is acquitted, or else, he is immediately executed.
כֵּיצַד דָּנִין דִּינֵי נְפָשׁוֹת. כְּשֶׁיָּבוֹאוּ עֵדִים לְבֵית דִּין וְאוֹמְרִים רָאִינוּ פְּלוֹנִי זֶה שֶׁעָבַר עֲבֵרָה פְּלוֹנִית. אוֹמְרִין לָהֶן מַכִּירִין אַתֶּם אוֹתוֹ הִתְרֵיתֶם בּוֹ. אִם אָמְרוּ אֵין אָנוּ מַכִּירִין אוֹתוֹ אוֹ נִסְתַּפֵּק לָנוּ אוֹ שֶׁלֹּא הִתְרוּ בּוֹ הֲרֵי זֶה פָּטוּר:
How are cases involving capital punishment judged? When the witnesses come to the court and say: “We saw this person violate such-and-such a transgression,” the judges ask them: “Do you recognize him? Did you give him a warning?”
If they answer: “We do not recognize him,” “We are unsure of his identity,” or “We did not warn him,” the defendant is exonerated.
אֶחָד תַּלְמִיד חָכָם וְאֶחָד עַם הָאָרֶץ צָרִיךְ הַתְרָאָה שֶׁלֹּא נִתְּנָה הַתְרָאָה אֶלָּא לְהַבְחִין בֵּין שׁוֹגֵג לְמֵזִיִד שֶׁמָּא שׁוֹגֵג הָיָה. וְכֵיצַד מַתְרִין בּוֹ. אוֹמְרִין לוֹ פְּרשׁ אוֹ אַל תַּעֲשֶׂה שֶׁזּוֹ עֲבֵרָה הִיא וְחַיָּב אַתָּה עָלֶיהָ מִיתַת בֵּית דִּין אוֹ מַלְקוֹת. אִם פֵּרַשׁ פָּטוּר. וְכֵן אִם שָׁתַק אוֹ הִרְכִּין בְּרֹאשׁוֹ פָּטוּר. וַאֲפִלּוּ אָמַר יוֹדֵעַ אֲנִי פָּטוּר עַד שֶׁיַּתִּיר עַצְמוֹ לְמִיתָה וְיֹאמַר עַל מְנָת כֵּן אֲנִי עוֹשֶׂה. וְאַחַר כָּךְ יֵהָרֵג. וְצָרִיךְ שֶׁיַּעֲבֹר וְיַעֲשֶׂה תֵּכֶף לַהַתְרָאָה בְּתוֹךְ כְּדֵי דִּבּוּר. אֲבָל אַחַר כְּדֵי דִּבּוּר צָרִיךְ הַתְרָאָה אַחֶרֶת. וּבֵין שֶׁהִתְרָה בּוֹ אֶחָד מִן הָעֵדִים וּבֵין שֶׁהִתְרָה בּוֹ אַחֵר בִּפְנֵי עֵדִים אֲפִלּוּ אִשָּׁה אוֹ עֶבֶד אֲפִלּוּ שָׁמַע קוֹל הַמַּתְרֶה וְלֹא רָאָהוּ וַאֲפִלּוּ הִתְרָה בְּעַצְמוֹ הֲרֵי זֶה נֶהֱרָג:
Both a Torah scholar and a common person need a warning, for the obligation for a warning was instituted only to make a distinction between a person who transgresses inadvertently and one who transgresses intentionally, lest the person say: “I transgressed inadvertently.”
How is a warning administered? We tell him: “Desist…” or “Do not do it. It is a transgression and you are liable to be executed by the court…” or “to receive lashes for it.” If he ceases, he is not liable. Similarly, if he remains silent or nods his head, he is not liable for punishment. Even if he says: “I know,” he is not liable for punishment until he accepts death upon himself, saying: “It is for this reason that I am doing this.” In such a situation, he is executed.
He must commit the transgression directly after receiving the warning, within the time to offer a salutation. If he waits longer than that, a second warning is necessary.
The warning is acceptable whether it was administered by one of the witnesses or by another individual, even a woman or a servant. Even if the transgressor hears the voice of the person administering the warning, but does not see him, and even if he himself administers the warning, he should be executed.
אָמְרוּ הָעֵדִים הָיְתָה לוֹ הַתְרָאָה וּמַכִּירִין אָנוּ אוֹתוֹ מְאַיְּמִין בֵּית דִּין עֲלֵיהֶן. וְכֵיצַד מְאַיְּמִין עַל עִסְקֵי נְפָשׁוֹת. אוֹמְרִים לָהֶן שֶׁמָּא תֹּאמְרוּ מֵאֹמֶד וּמִשְּׁמוּעָה עֵד מִפִּי עֵד מִפִּי אָדָם נֶאֱמָן שְׁמַעְתֶּם. אוֹ שֶׁמָּא אֵין אַתֶּם יוֹדְעִים שֶׁסּוֹפֵנוּ לִבְדֹּק אֶתְכֶם בִּדְרִישָׁה וַחֲקִירָה. הֱווּ יוֹדְעִים שֶׁלֹּא כְּדִינֵי מָמוֹנוֹת דִּינֵי נְפָשׁוֹת. דִּינֵי מָמוֹנוֹת אָדָם נוֹתֵן מָמוֹנוֹ וּמִתְכַּפֵּר לוֹ דִּינֵי נְפָשׁוֹת דָּמוֹ וְדַם זַרְעוֹ תְּלוּיִין בּוֹ עַד סוֹף כָּל הָעוֹלָם שֶׁהֲרֵי בְּקַיִן נֶאֱמַר (בראשית ד י) “קוֹל דְּמֵי אָחִיךָ צֹעֲקִים” דָּמוֹ וְדַם זַרְעוֹ. לְפִיכָךְ נִבְרָא אָדָם יְחִידִי בָּעוֹלָם לְלַמֵּד שֶׁכָּל הַמְאַבֵּד נֶפֶשׁ אַחַת מִן הָעוֹלָם מַעֲלִין עָלָיו כְּאִלּוּ אִבֵּד עוֹלָם מָלֵא וְכָל הַמְקַיֵּם נֶפֶשׁ אַחַת בָּעוֹלָם מַעֲלִין עָלָיו כְּאִלּוּ קִיֵּם עוֹלָם מָלֵא. הֲרֵי כָּל בָּאֵי עוֹלָם בְּצוּרַת אָדָם הָרִאשׁוֹן הֵם נִבְרָאִים וְאֵין פְּנֵי כָּל אֶחָד מֵהֶן דּוֹמִין לִפְנֵי חֲבֵרוֹ. לְפִיכָךְ כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד יָכוֹל לוֹמַר בִּשְׁבִילִי נִבְרָא הָעוֹלָם. שֶׁמָּא תֹּאמְרוּ מַה לָּנוּ וּלְצָרָה זוֹ הֲלֹא כְּבָר נֶאֱמַר (ויקרא ה א) “וְהוּא עֵד אוֹ רָאָה אוֹ יָדָע”. אוֹ שֶׁמָּא תֹּאמְרוּ מַה לָּנוּ לָחוֹב בְּדָמוֹ שֶׁל זֶה וַהֲלֹא כְּבָר נֶאֱמַר (משלי יא י) “וּבַאֲבֹד רְשָׁעִים רִנָּה”. אִם עָמְדוּ בְּדִבְרֵיהֶן מַכְנִיסִין אֶת הַגָּדוֹל שֶׁבָּעֵדִים וּבוֹדְקִים אוֹתוֹ בִּדְרִישָׁה וַחֲקִירָה כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר בְּהִלְכוֹת עֵדוּת. אִם נִמְצֵאת עֵדוּתוֹ מְכֻוֶּנֶת מַכְנִיסִין אֶת הַשֵּׁנִי וּבוֹדְקִין אוֹתוֹ כָּרִאשׁוֹן. אֲפִלּוּ הָיוּ מֵאָה עֵדִים בּוֹדְקִין כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד בִּדְרִישָׁה וַחֲקִירָה. נִמְצְאוּ דִּבְרֵי כָּל הָעֵדִים מְכֻוָּנִים פּוֹתְחִין לִזְכוּת כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ. וְאוֹמְרִים אִם לֹא חָטָאתָ אַל תִּירָא מִדִּבְרֵיהֶם וְדָנִין אוֹתוֹ. אִם מָצְאוּ לוֹ זְכוּת פְּטָרוּהוּ וְאִם לֹא מָצְאוּ לוֹ זְכוּת אוֹסְרִין אוֹתוֹ עַד לְמָחָר. וּבוֹ בַּיּוֹם מִזְדַּוְּגִין הַסַּנְהֶדְרִין זוּגוֹת זוּגוֹת לְעַיֵּן בְּדִינוֹ. וּמְמַעֲטִין בְּמַאֲכָל וְאֵין שׁוֹתִין יַיִן כָּל אוֹתוֹ הַיּוֹם. וְנוֹשְׂאִין בַּדָּבָר כָּל הַלַּיְלָה כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד עִם זוּג שֶׁלּוֹ אוֹ עִם עַצְמוֹ בְּבֵיתוֹ. וְלַמָּחֳרָת מַשְׁכִּימִין לְבֵית דִּין. הַמְזַכֶּה אוֹמֵר אֲנִי הוּא הַמְזַכֶּה וּמְזַכֶּה אֲנִי בִּמְקוֹמִי וְהַמְחַיֵּב אוֹמֵר אֲנִי הוּא הַמְחַיֵּב וּמְחַיֵּב אֲנִי בִּמְקוֹמִי אוֹ חָזַרְתִּי בִּי וַאֲנִי מְזַכֶּה. וְאִם טָעוּ בַּדָּבָר וְלֹא יָדְעוּ מִי הֵם שֶׁחִיְּבוּ אוֹ זִכּוּ מִטַּעַם אֶחָד שֶׁאֵינָן נֶחְשָׁבִין אֶלָּא כְּאֶחָד כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ. הֲרֵי סוֹפְרֵי הַדַּיָּנִין מַזְכִּירִין אוֹתָן שֶׁהֲרֵי כּוֹתְבִין טַעַם שֶׁל כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד. וּמַתְחִילִין בְּדִינוֹ. אִם מָצְאוּ לוֹ זְכוּת פְּטָרוּהוּ וְאִם הֻצְרְכוּ לְהוֹסִיף מוֹסִיפִין. רַבּוּ הַמְחַיְּבִין וְנִתְחַיֵּב מוֹצִיאִין אוֹתוֹ לְהָרְגוֹ. ומָקוֹם שֶׁהוֹרְגִין בּוֹ בֵּית דִּין הָיָה חוּץ לְבֵית דִּין וְרָחוֹק מִבֵּית דִּין. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כד יד) “הוֹצֵא אֶת הַמְקַלֵּל אֶל מִחוּץ לַמַּחֲנֶה”. וְיֵרָאֶה לִי שֶׁיִּהְיֶה רָחוֹק כְּמוֹ שִׁשָּׁה מִילִין כְּמוֹ שֶׁהָיָה בֵּין בֵּית דִּינוֹ שֶׁל משֶׁה רַבֵּנוּ שֶׁהָיָה לִפְנֵי פֶּתַח אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד וּבֵין מַחֲנֵה יִשְׂרָאֵל:
If the witnesses say: “He was given a warning and we recognize him,” the court intimidates them.
How do they intimidate them in cases involving capital punishment? They say: “Maybe you are speaking on the basis of supposition, or on the basis of hearsay, one witness from another witness, or maybe you heard from a trustworthy person?” “Maybe you do not know that ultimately we will subject you to questions and crossexamination?”“Know that cases involving capital punishment do not resemble those involving financial matters. With regard to financial matters, if there is any deceit, a person can make financial restitution and receive atonement. With regard to capital punishment, the victim’s blood and the blood of his unborn descendants are dependent on the murderer until eternity. As it is said with regard to Cain, ‘The voice of the blood of your brother is crying out.’ The Torah uses the plural form of the word blood, implying his blood and the blood of his descendants.
“For this reason, man was created alone in the world. This teaches us that a person who eliminates one soul from the world is considered as if he eliminated an entire world. Conversely, a person who saves one soul is considered as if he saved an entire world.
“All the inhabitants of the world are created in the image of Adam, the first man, and yet no one person’s face resembles the face of his colleague. Therefore each person can say: ‘The world was created for me.‘
”If you might say: ‘Why should we enter this difficulty?’ It is written Leviticus 5:1: ‘If he witnessed, observed, or knew…’ If you will say: ‘Why should we become responsible for shedding the defendant’s blood? It is already said: ‘At the destruction of the wicked, there is joy. ’If they stand by their word, the witness of the greater stature is brought into the court alone and he is questioned and cross-examined, as will be explained in Hilchot Edut. If his testimony appears to be factual, the second witness is brought into the court, and he is questioned as the first one was. Even if there are 100 witnesses, each one is questioned and cross-examined.
If the testimony of all the witnesses is accurate, we begin the judgment with a statement that tends to acquittal as stated. We tell him: “If you did not transgress, do not fear their words.” Then we judge him. If grounds for acquittal are found, he is released. If they do not find grounds for acquittal, the defendant is imprisoned until the following day.
On that day, the Sanhedrin divides itself into pairs and they examine the judgment. They eat little and do not drink wine throughout that entire day. They debate the matter throughout the night, each one with his comrade or alone. On the morrow, they come to the court early. Each of those who voted for acquittal state: “I am the one who voted for acquittal yesterday, and I still favor that ruling.” Each of those who voted for conviction state: “I am the one who voted for conviction yesterday, and I still favor that ruling,” or “…I have changed my mind and I vote for acquittal.” If they erred in that regard, or did not know who voted for conviction or who voted for acquittal on the basis of one rationale and hence are considered only as one, as we explained, the two scribes of the court remind them, for they write down the rationale given by each one of them.
We begin the judgment. If they find a rationale to acquit him, they acquit him. If it is necessary to add judges, they add. If there is a majority of judges who seek to convict him, and he is convicted, he is taken out to be executed immediately.
The place where the court conducts the execution is outside the court and removed from it, as implied by Leviticus 24:14: “Take the blasphemer outside the camp…” It appears to me that it should be approximately 6 mil , the distance between the court of Moses our teacher which was before the entrance of the Tent of Meeting and the extremities of the camp of the Jewish people.
Mishneh Torah by Maimonaides, Sefer Shoftim (Judges), Eidus (Testimony), Page 4, 1:
עֵדֵי נְפָשׁוֹת צְרִיכִין שֶׁיִּהְיוּ שְׁנֵיהֶם רוֹאִים אֶת הָעוֹשֶׂה עֲבֵרָה כְּאֶחָד. וּצְרִיכִין לְהָעִיד כְּאֶחָד וּבְבֵית דִּין אֶחָד. אֲבָל דִּינֵי מָמוֹנוֹת אֵין צְרִיכִין לְכָךְ. כֵּיצַד. הָיָה אֶחָד רוֹאֵהוּ מֵחַלּוֹן זֶה כְּשֶׁעָבַר הָעֲבֵרָה וְהָעֵד הָאַחֵר רוֹאֵהוּ מֵחַלּוֹן אַחֵר. אִם הָיוּ שְׁנֵי הָעֵדִים רוֹאִין זֶה אֶת זֶה מִצְטָרְפִין וְאִם לָאו אֵין מִצְטָרְפִין. הָיָה זֶה הַמַּתְרֶה בּוֹ רוֹאֶה הָעֵדִים וְהָעֵדִים רוֹאִין אוֹתוֹ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין רוֹאִין זֶה אֶת זֶה הַמַּתְרֶה מְצָרְפָן. הָיוּ שְׁנֵי הָעֵדִים בְּבַיִת אֶחָד וְהוֹצִיא אֶחָד מֵהֶן רֹאשׁוֹ מִן הַחַלּוֹן. וְרָאָהוּ זֶה שֶׁעוֹשֶׂה מְלָאכָה בְּשַׁבָּת וְאֶחָד מַתְרֶה בּוֹ. וְהִכְנִיס רֹאשׁוֹ וְחָזַר הָעֵד הַשֵּׁנִי וְהוֹצִיא רֹאשׁוֹ מֵאוֹתוֹ הַחַלּוֹן וְרָאָהוּ. אֵין מִצְטָרְפִין עַד שֶׁיִּרְאוּ שְׁנֵיהֶם כְּאֶחָד. הָיוּ שְׁנֵי עֵדִים רוֹאִין אוֹתוֹ מֵחַלּוֹן זֶה וּשְׁנֵי עֵדִים רוֹאִין אוֹתוֹ מֵחַלּוֹן אַחֵר וְאֶחָד מַתְרֶה בּוֹ בָּאֶמְצַע. בִּזְמַן שֶׁמִּקְצָתָן רוֹאִין אֵלּוּ אֶת אֵלּוּ הֲרֵי זוֹ עֵדוּת אַחַת וְאִם לֹא הָיוּ רוֹאִין אֵלּוּ אֶת אֵלּוּ וְלֹא צֵרֵף אוֹתָן הַמַּתְרֶה הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ שְׁתֵּי עֵדוּיוֹת. לְפִיכָךְ אִם נִמְצֵאת כַּת אַחַת מֵהֶן זוֹמְמִין הוּא וְהֵן נֶהֱרָגִין שֶׁהֲרֵי הוּא נֶהֱרָג בְּעֵדוּת הַכַּת הַשְּׁנִיָּה:
Both witnesses in cases involving capital punishment must see the person committing the transgression at the same time. They must deliver their testimony together, in the same court. These requirements do not apply with regard to cases involving financial matters.
What is implied? If while looking from one window, a witness saw the person commit the transgression and the other witness saw him from the other window, their testimonies can be combined if they see each other. If they cannot see each other, their testimonies cannot be combined. If a person who administered the warning sees the witnesses and the witnesses see him, because of the person administering the warning, their testimony is combined even though they do not see each other.
If they do not see the transgression at the same time, their testimony is not combined. For example, the two witnesses were in one house and one stuck his head out of the window and saw a person perform a forbidden labor on the Sabbath and another person issue a warning. He then thrust in his head and the other witness stuck his head out of the same window and saw the person commit the transgression. Their testimonies cannot be combined unless they both see the transgression at the same time.
The following laws apply when two witnesses see the transgressor from one window, two other witnesses see him from another window, and there is a person who gives a warning in between. If some of them see each other, they are considered as one group of witnesses. If they do not see each other and the person giving the warning does not include them together, they are considered as two groups of witnesses. Therefore if one group are discovered to be zomamim, the transgressor and the witnesses are executed. For the transgressor is executed on the basis of the testimony of the second group of witnesses.
Dealing with Serial Killers
They are the ones who are known to be killers, but there are no legally valid witnesses, although the truth is clear. They are “indirectly” executed by sending them to a Kippah.
Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin, Page 81b, 1-4:
He is put in a Kippah (small chamber) and is fed sparing bread and scant water until his intestines explode.
מַתְנִי׳ הַהוֹרֵג נֶפֶשׁ שֶׁלֹּא בְּעֵדִים, מַכְנִיסִין אוֹתוֹ לַכִּיפָּה וּמַאֲכִילִין אוֹתוֹ לֶחֶם צָר וּמַיִם לָחַץ.
MISHNA: With regard to one who kills a person not in the presence of witnesses and it is impossible to judge him in court, the court places him into a vaulted chamber and feeds him sparing bread and scant water (see Isaiah 30:20).
גְּמָ׳ מְנָא יָדְעִינַן? אָמַר רַב: בְּעֵדוּת מְיוּחֶדֶת. וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר: שֶׁלֹּא בְּהַתְרָאָה.
GEMARA: The Gemara asks: If there are no witnesses, from where do we know that he killed a person and is liable to be punished? Rav says: The tanna of the mishna is speaking about a case of disjointed testimony, where the witnesses were not together and they witnessed the murder from different vantage points. The court cannot convict a person for committing a murder based on that type of testimony even though it is clear that the witnesses are telling the truth. And Shmuel says: The tanna of the mishna is speaking about a case where the witnesses testified that they witnessed the murder but there was no forewarning, and therefore the court cannot convict him.
וְרַב חִסְדָּא אָמַר אֲבִימִי: כְּגוֹן דְּאִיתַּכְחוּשׁ בִּבְדִיקוֹת וְלָא אִיתַּכְחוּשׁ בַּחֲקִירוֹת, כְּדִתְנַן: מַעֲשֶׂה וּבָדַק בֶּן זַכַּאי בְּעוּקְצֵי תְאֵנִים.
And Rav Ḥisda says that Avimi says: The tanna of the mishna is speaking of a case where the witnesses contradicted each other in the examinations that involve matters peripheral to the murder but did not contradict each other in the interrogations, which are integral to the murder, i.e., time and place. Therefore, it is clear to the court that the accused is guilty and consequently they place him in the vaulted chamber. As we learned in a mishna (40a): There was an incident and ben Zakkai examined the witnesses with regard to the stems of figs on the fig tree beneath which the murder took place. Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai questioned the witnesses about the thickness of the stems in order to determine whether they would contradict each other in this peripheral detail in order to save the accused (see 41a).
וּמַאֲכִילִין אוֹתוֹ לֶחֶם צָר וּמַיִם לָחַץ. מַאי שְׁנָא הָכָא דְּקָתָנֵי: נוֹתְנִין לוֹ לֶחֶם צָר וּמַיִם לָחַץ, וּמַאי שְׁנָא הָתָם דְּקָתָנֵי: מַאֲכִילִין אוֹתוֹ שְׂעוֹרִין עַד שֶׁכְּרֵיסוֹ מִתְבַּקַּעַת? אָמַר רַב שֵׁשֶׁת: אִידֵּי וְאִידֵּי נוֹתְנִין לוֹ לֶחֶם צָר וּמַיִם לָחַץ עַד שֶׁיּוּקְטַן מַעְיָינוֹ, וַהֲדַר מַאֲכִילִין אוֹתוֹ שְׂעוֹרִין עַד שֶׁכְּרֵיסוֹ מִתְבַּקַּעַת.
The mishna teaches: And feeds him sparing bread and scant water. The Gemara asks: What is different in the mishna here that the tanna teaches that the court gives him sparing bread and scant water in the vaulted chamber, and what is different in the previous mishna there that the tanna teaches that the court feeds him barley bread until his belly ruptures; are these two different punishments? Rav Sheshet says: Both this and that are one punishment; first, the court gives him sparing bread and scant water until his intestines contract due to his starvation diet, and then the court feeds him barley bread that expands in his innards until his belly ruptures.
Mishneh Torah by Maimonaides, Sefer Nezikim, Rotzeach (Murder and The Preservation of Life), Page 4:8:
It codifies the above law.
הַהוֹרֵג נְפָשׁוֹת וְלֹא הָיוּ עֵדִים רוֹאִין אוֹתוֹ כְּאַחַת אֶלָּא רָאָהוּ הָאֶחָד אַחַר הָאֶחָד אוֹ שֶׁהָרַג בִּפְנֵי שְׁנֵי עֵדִים בְּלֹא הַתְרָאָה אוֹ שֶׁהֻכְחֲשׁוּ הָעֵדִים בִּבְדִיקוֹת וְלֹא הֻכְחֲשׁוּ בַּחֲקִירוֹת. כָּל אֵלּוּ הָרַצְחָנִים כּוֹנְסִין אוֹתָן לְכִפָּה וּמַאֲכִילִין אוֹתָן לֶחֶם צַר וּמַיִם לַחַץ עַד שֶׁיָּצֵרוּ מֵעֵיהֶן וְאַחַר כָּךְ מַאֲכִילִין אוֹתָן שְׂעוֹרִים עַד שֶׁתִּבָּקַע כְּרֵסָם מִכֹּבֶד הַחלִי:
The following laws apply when a person kills people, but the witnesses did not observe his act together - instead one saw him after the other did: a person killed in the presence of witnesses, but a warning was not given; or the witnesses to a murder contradicted each other with regard to the fine points of the testimony, but not with regard to the fundamental questions.
All those murderers should be forced to enter a kipah.There they are fed parched bread and small amounts of water until their digestive tract contracts. Then they are fed barley until their bellies burst because of the extent of the sickness and they die.
Cases of Executions
In the Miqra
- Vayikra (Leviticus) 24:23 (Moshe’s Court executing the Blasphemer)
- Bambidar (Numbers) 15:36 (Moshe’s Court executing the Shabbos violator)
- Yehoshua (Joshua) 7:25 (Yehoshua’s Court executing Achan for taking from the spoils of Jericho)
- 1 Kings 21:13 (Nabouth being executed by the court of Jezreel on false charges)
In the Talmud
I found 8 cases.
(1/8) Rabbi Yehuda ben Tabbai sentencing a false witness to death who was not to be punished, by a wrong understanding
Babylonian Talmud, Seder Moed, Chagigah, Page 16b:3-7:
מַאן תְּנָא לְהָא דְּתָנוּ רַבָּנַן: אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶּן טָבַאי: אֶרְאֶה בְּנֶחָמָה אִם לֹא הָרַגְתִּי עֵד זוֹמֵם, לְהוֹצִיא מִלִּבָּן שֶׁל צַדּוּקִין. שֶׁהָיוּ אוֹמְרִים: אֵין עֵדִים זוֹמְמִין נֶהֱרָגִין עַד שֶׁיֵּהָרֵג הַנִּידּוֹן.
The Gemara asks: Who is the tanna who taught that which the Sages taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yehuda ben Tabbai said: I swear that I will not see the consolation of Israel if I did not kill a conspiring witness. This means that Rabbi Yehuda ben Tabbai sentenced a conspiring witness to death, in order to counter the views of the Sadducees, who would say: Conspiring witnesses are not executed unless the sentenced one has been executed. Their views opposed the traditional view, which maintains that conspiring witnesses are executed only if the one sentenced by their testimony has not yet been executed.
אָמַר לוֹ שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן שָׁטַח: אֶרְאֶה בְּנֶחָמָה אִם לֹא שָׁפַכְתָּ דָּם נָקִי, שֶׁהֲרֵי אָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים: אֵין עֵדִים זוֹמְמִין נֶהֱרָגִין עַד שֶׁיִּזּוֹמּוּ שְׁנֵיהֶם, וְאֵין לוֹקִין עַד שֶׁיִּזּוֹמּוּ שְׁנֵיהֶם, וְאֵין מְשַׁלְּמִין מָמוֹן עַד שֶׁיִּזּוֹמּוּ שְׁנֵיהֶם.
Shimon ben Shataḥ said to him: I swear that I will not see the consolation of Israel if you did not shed innocent blood, as the Sages said: Conspiring witnesses are not executed unless they are both found to be conspirators; if only one is found to be a conspirator, he is not executed. And they are not flogged if they are liable to such a penalty, unless they are both found to be conspirators. And if they testified falsely that someone owed money, they do not pay money unless they are both found to be conspirators.
מִיָּד קִבֵּל עָלָיו יְהוּדָה בֶּן טָבַאי שֶׁאֵינוֹ מוֹרֶה הֲלָכָה אֶלָּא בִּפְנֵי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן שָׁטַח.
Hearing this, Yehuda ben Tabbai immediately accepted upon himself not to rule on any matter of law unless he was in the presence of Shimon ben Shataḥ, as he realized he could not rely on his own judgment.
כׇּל יָמָיו שֶׁל יְהוּדָה בֶּן טָבַאי הָיָה מִשְׁתַּטֵּחַ עַל קִבְרוֹ שֶׁל אוֹתוֹ הָרוּג, וְהָיָה קוֹלוֹ נִשְׁמָע. כִּסְבוּרִין הָעָם לוֹמַר שֶׁקּוֹלוֹ שֶׁל הָרוּג הוּא. אָמַר לָהֶם: קוֹלִי הוּא. תֵּדְעוּ, שֶׁלְּמָחָר הוּא מֵת, וְאֵין קוֹלוֹ נִשְׁמָע.
The baraita further relates: All of Yehuda ben Tabbai’s days, he would prostrate himself on the grave of that executed individual, to request forgiveness, and his voice was heard weeping. The people thought that it was the voice of that executed person, rising from his grave. Yehuda ben Tabbai said to them: It is my voice, and you shall know that it is so, for tomorrow, i.e., sometime in the future, he will die, and his voice will no longer be heard. Yehuda ben Tabbai was referring to himself, but he did not want to mention something negative about himself in direct terms.
אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב אַחָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרָבָא לְרַב אָשֵׁי: וְדִלְמָא פַּיּוֹסֵי פַּיְּיסֵיהּ, אוֹ בְּדִינָא תַּבְעֵיהּ.
Rav Aḥa, son of Rava, said to Rav Ashi: This provides no conclusive proof that the voice was not that of the executed man, as perhaps ben Tabbai appeased the executed individual in the World-to-Come. Or, alternatively, the latter may have prosecuted him by the law of Heaven, and that is why his voice can no longer be heard.
Babylonian Talmud, Seder Nezikin, Makkos, Page 5b:17-20:
תַּנְיָא, אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶּן טָבַאי: אֶרְאֶה בְּנֶחָמָה אִם לֹא הָרַגְתִּי עֵד זוֹמֵם לְהוֹצִיא מִלִּבָּן שֶׁל צַדּוּקִים. שֶׁהָיוּ אוֹמְרִים: אֵין הָעֵדִים זוֹמְמִין נֶהֱרָגִין עַד שֶׁיֵּהָרֵג הַנִּדּוֹן.
§ Apropos the dispute between the Sadducees and the Sages, it is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yehuda ben Tabbai says in the form of an oath: I will not see the future consolation of the Jewish people if I did not as a member of the court kill a single conspiring witness, in order to eradicate this reasoning from the hearts of the Sadducees, who would say: The conspiring witnesses are executed only if they are rendered conspiring witnesses after the accused will be killed. Rabbi Yehuda ben Tabbai killed the conspiring witness while the accused remained alive.
אָמַר לוֹ שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן שָׁטַח: אֶרְאֶה בְּנֶחָמָה אִם לֹא שָׁפַכְתָּ דָּם נָקִי, שֶׁהֲרֵי אָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים: אֵין הָעֵדִים זוֹמְמִין נֶהֱרָגִין עַד שֶׁיִּזּוֹמּוּ שְׁנֵיהֶם, וְאֵין לוֹקִין עַד שֶׁיִּזּוֹמּוּ שְׁנֵיהֶם.
Shimon ben Shataḥ said to him: I will not see the consolation of the Jewish people if you did not shed thereby innocent blood, as the Sages said: Conspiring witnesses are not executed unless both of them are rendered conspiring witnesses, and they are not flogged unless both of them are rendered conspiring witnesses. In this case, only one was rendered a conspiring witness.
מִיָּד קִבֵּל עָלָיו רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶּן טָבַאי שֶׁאֵינוֹ מוֹרֶה הוֹרָאָה אֶלָּא לִפְנֵי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן שָׁטַח. וְכׇל יָמָיו שֶׁל רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶּן טָבַאי הָיָה מִשְׁתַּטֵּחַ עַל קִבְרוֹ שֶׁל אוֹתוֹ הָעֵד, וְהָיָה קוֹלוֹ נִשְׁמָע, וְכִסְבוּרִין הָעָם לוֹמַר: קוֹלוֹ שֶׁל הָרוּג. אָמַר: קוֹלִי שֶׁלִּי הוּא, תֵּדְעוּ – לְמָחָר הוּא מֵת, אֵין קוֹלוֹ נִשְׁמָע.
Rabbi Yehuda ben Tabbai immediately accepted a commitment upon himself that he would issue a halakhic ruling only when he was before Shimon ben Shataḥ, to avoid mistakes in the future. And throughout all of Rabbi Yehuda ben Tabbai’s days he would tearfully prostrate himself on the grave of that witness whom he executed, to request forgiveness for having done so, and his voice was heard from a distance. And the people thought to say that it was the voice of the executed witness that was heard. Rabbi Yehuda ben Tabbai said to them: It is my voice. Know that this is so, as tomorrow, i.e., sometime in the future, he, referring to himself, will die, and his voice will no longer be heard.
אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב אַחָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרָבָא לְרַב אָשֵׁי: דִּלְמָא בְּדִינָא קָם בַּהֲדֵיהּ, אִי נָמֵי פַּיּוֹסֵי פַּיְּיסֵיהּ.
Rav Aḥa, son of Rava, said to Rav Ashi: The fact that the voice will cease after Rabbi Yehuda ben Tabbai’s death is inconclusive as proof that the voice is not that of the executed witness. Perhaps the reason that the voice of the executed person will no longer be heard is that he confronted Rabbi Yehuda ben Tabbai in trial before the heavenly court, obviating the need for crying from his grave. Alternatively, perhaps Rabbi Yehuda ben Tabbai appeased the executed witness in the World-to-Come, and there is silence because no grievances remained.
(2/8) Shimon ben Shatach executing 80 women who practiced witchcraft
Babylonian Talmud, Seder Nezikin, Sanhedrin, Page 45b:21:
הָאִישׁ תּוֹלִין אוֹתוֹ פָּנָיו כְּלַפֵּי הָעָם, וְהָאִשָּׁה פָּנֶיהָ כְּלַפֵּי הָעֵץ; דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: הָאִישׁ נִתְלֶה וְאֵין הָאִשָּׁה נִתְלֵית. אָמַר לָהֶן רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר: וַהֲלֹא שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן שָׁטַח תָּלָה נָשִׁים בְּאַשְׁקְלוֹן? אָמְרוּ לוֹ: שְׁמוֹנִים נָשִׁים תָּלָה, וְאֵין דָּנִין שְׁנַיִם בְּיוֹם אֶחָד.
The corpse of a man is hung facing the people, but the corpse of a woman, out of modesty, is hung facing the tree; this is the statement of Rabbi Eliezer. And the Rabbis say: the corpse of a man is hung, but the corpse of a woman is not hung. Rabbi Eliezer said to the Rabbis: Did Shimon ben Shataḥ not hang in Ashkelon women who were found guilty of witchcraft, proving that the corpse of a woman who is executed is also hung? They said to him: No proof can be brought from here, as he hanged eighty women on that day, and the halakha is that the same court may not judge even two people charged with capital transgressions on the same day. It is therefore clear that he was not acting in accordance with Torah law, but rather his execution of the eighty women was an extraordinary punishment necessitated by unusually pressing circumstances.
Jerusalem Talmud, Seder Moed, Chagigah, 2.2.6:
מָאן דְּאָמַר. שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן שֶׁטַח נָשִׂיא. עוֹבְדָא דְאַשְׁקְלוֹן מְסַיֵיעַ לֵיהּ. תְּרֵין חֲסִידִין הֲווֹן בְאַשְׁקְלוֹן אָֽכְלִין כְּחָדָא וְשָׁתֵיי כְּחָדָא וְלָעֵיי בְּאוֹרַיְתָא כְּחָדָא. דְּמָךְ חַד מִינְּהוֹן וְלָא אִיתְגְּמַל לֵיהּ חֶסֶד. מִית בְּרֵיהּ דְּמַעְיָן מוּכָּס וּבְטֵלַת כָּל־מְדִינְתָא מִיגְמוֹל לֵיהּ חֶסֶד. שׁוֹרִי הַהוּא חֲסִידָא מִצְטָעֵר. אֲמַר. ווַי דְּלֵית לְשֹׂנְאֵיהוֹן דְּיִשְׂרָאֵל כְּלוּם. אִיתְחֲמִי לֵיהּ בְּחֶילְמָא וַאֲמַר לֵיהּ. לָא תִיבְזִי בְנֵי מָרֵיךְ. דֵּין עֲבַד חָדָא חוֹבָא וַאֲזַל בָּהּ. וְדֵין עֲבַד חָדָא טִיבוּ וַאֲזַל בָּהּ. וּמַה חוֹבָא עֲבַד הַהוּא חָסִידָא. [חַס] לֵיהּ לָא עֲבַד חוֹבָה מִן יוֹמוֹי. אֶלָּא פַעַם אַחַת הִקְדִּים תָּפִילִּין שֶׁל רֹאשׁ לִתְפִילִּין שֶׁל יַד. וּמַה טִיבוּ עֲבַד בְּרֵיהּ דְּמַעְיָן מוּכָּס. חַס לֵיהּ לָא עֲבַד טִיבוּ מִן יוֹמוֹי. אֶלָּא חַד זְמָן עֲבַד אֲרִיסְטוֹן לְבוּלֶבָטַייָא וְלָא אֲתוֹן אַכְלוּנֵיהּ. אֲמַר. יֵיכְלוּנֵיהּ מִיסְכֵּינַייָא דְּלָא יִטְ[לוֹן]. וְאִית דְּאָֽמְרִין. בְּשׁוּקָא הֲוָה עֲבַר וּנְפַל מִינֵיהּ חַד עִיגּוּל. וַחֲמָא חַד מִיסְכֵּן וּנְסַב לֵיהּ וְלֹא אָמַר לֵיהּ כְּלוּם [בְּגִין דְּלָא מְסַמְּקִי אַפּוֹיי]. בָּתָר יוֹמִין חֲמָא הַהוּא חָסִידָא לְחָסִידָא חַבְרֵיהּ מְטַיֵיל גַּו גַּנִּין גַּו פַּרְדֵּיסִין גַּו מַבּוּעִין דְּמַיי. וַחֲמָא לִבְרֵיהּ דְּמַעְיָן מוּכָּס לְשׁוֹנוֹ שׁוֹתֵת עַל פִּי הַנָּהָר. בְּעֵי מַמְטֵי מַיָּא וְלָא מַטֵּי. וַחֲמָא לְמִרְיָם בְּרַת עֲלֵי בְצָלִים. רִבִּי לָֽעְזָר בַּר יוֹסֵה אָמַר. תַּלְייָא בְחִיטֵּי בִיזַייָא. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֶּן חֲנִינָה אָמַר. צִירָא דְּתִרְעַא דְּגֵיהִנֹּם קְבִיעָ בְּאוּדְנָהּ. אֲמַר לוֹן. לָמָּה דָא כֵן. אָֽמְרִין לֵיהּ. דַּהֲוָות צַייְמָה וּמְפַרְסְִמָה. וְאִית דְּאָֽמְרֵי. דַּהֲוָות צַייְמָה חַד יוֹם וּמְקַזָּה לֵיהּ תְּרֵיי. אֲמַר לוֹן. עַד אֵימַת הִיא כֵן. אָֽמְרֵי לֵיהּ. עַד דְּיֵיתֵי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן שֶׁטַח וַאֲנָן מְרִימִין לָהּ מִן גַּו אוּדְנָהּ וְקָֽבְעִין לֵיהּ גַּו אוּדְנֵיהּ. [אֲמַר לוֹן. וְלָמָּה. אָֽמְרֵי לֵיהּ.] דַּאֲמַר. אִין אֲנָא מִתְעֲבִיד נְשִׂייָא אֲנָא מְקַטֵּל חָרָשַׁייָא. וְהָא אִיתְעֲבִיד נְשִׂייָא וְלָא קְטַל חָרָשַׁיָּא. וְהָא אִית תְּמַנִּין נָשִׁין חָרָשִׁייָן יְהִיבִין גַּו מְעָֽרְתָא דְּאַשְׁקְלוֹן מְחַבְּלָן עָֽלְמָא. אֶלָּא אֵיזִיל אֱמוֹר לֵיהּ. אֲמַר לוֹן. אֲנָא דְחִיל דְּהוּא גְּבַר נְשִׂייָא וְלֵית הוּא מְהֵיימְנָתִי. אָֽמְרֵי לֵיהּ. אִי הֵימְנָךְ הָא טַבָּאוּת. וְאִין לָא [עֲבִיד הָדֵין סֵימָנָךְ קוֹמוֹי.] הַב יָדָךְ עַל עֵיינָךְ וְאַפְקָהּ וְחַזְרָהּ וְהִיא חָֽזְרָה. אֲזַל וְתַנֵּי לֵיהּ עוֹבְדָה. בָּעָא מֵיעֲבַד [סֵימָנָא] קוֹמוֹי וְלָא שַׁבְקוּהּ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ. יְדַע אֲנָא דְּאַתְּ גְּבַר חָסִיד. יְתִיר מִן כֵּן אַתְּ יְכִיל עֲבַד. וְלֹא עוֹד אֶלָּא בְּפוּמִי לָא אַמְרֵית. בְּלִיבִּי חַשְׁבֵית. מִיַּד עָמַד שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן שָׁטָח בְּיוֹם סַגְרִיר וּנְסַב עִימֵּיהּ תּוּמְנִין גּוּבְרִין בְּחִירִין. וִיהַב בִידֵיהוֹן תּוּמְנִיי לְבוּשִׁין נְקִיים וִיבוֹנָין גַּו קִידְרִין חַדְתִּין וְכַפּוֹנוֹן עַל רֵישֵׁיהוֹן. אֲמַר לוֹן. אִין צְפַרִית חַד זְמַן לַבְּשִׁוֹן לְבוּשֵׁיכוֹן. וְאִין צְפַרִית זֵמַן תִּנְייָן עוּלּוּן כּוּלְכוֹן כְּחָדָא. וְכֵיוָן דְּאַתּוּן עָֽלְלִין כָּל־חַד וָחַד מִינְּכוֹן יִגּוֹף חָדָא וִיטַלְטְלִינֵיהּ מִן אַרְעָא. דְּעִיסְקֵיהּ דְּהָדֵין חָרָשָׁא טַלְטְלִתְנֵיהּ מִן אַרְעָא לָא יְכִיל עֲבֲד כְּלוּם. אֲזַל וְקָם לֵיהּ עַל תִּרְעָא דִּמְעָֽרְתָא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ. אויים אויים. פִּתְחוּן לִי. דְּמִן דִּידְכָן אֲנָא. אָֽמְרוּן לֵיהּ. הֵיךְ אֲתִית לְהָכָא בְּהָדֵין יוֹמָא. אֲמַר לוֹן. בֵּינֵי טִיפַּייָא הֲוִינָא מְהַלֵּךְ. אָֽמְרוּן לֵיהּ. וּמָה אֲתִיתָא הָכָא מֵיעֲבֲד. אֲמַר. מֵילַף וּמֵילְפָא. כָּל־מַטֵּי יַעֲבִיד מַה דְהוּא חֲכַם. וַהֲוָת כָּל־חָדָא מִינְּהוֹן אָֽמְרָה מַה דָהִיא אָֽמְרָה וּמַייתֵיָא פִיתָּא. וְחָדָא אָֽמְרָה מַה דָהִיא אָֽמְרָה וּמַייתֵיָא קוּפָּד. אָֽמְרָה מַה דָהִיא אָֽמְרָה וּמַייתֵיָא תַבְשִׁילִין. אָֽמְרָה מַה דָהִיא אָֽמְרָה וּמַייתֵי חֲמָר. אָֽמְרוּן לֵיהּ. אַתְּ מָה אִית בָּךְ עֲבַד. אֲמַר לוֹן. אִית בִּי צְפַר תְּרֵין צַפְרִין וּמַייתִי לְכוֹן תְּמַנִּין גּובְרִין בְּחִירִין. הֲווֵי עִמְּכוֹן חֲדִיי וּמַחְדִּיי לְכוֹן. אָֽמְרוּן לֵיהּ. כֵּן אֲנָן בְּעָיי. צְפַר חָדָא זְמַן וְלָֽבְשׁוּן לְבוּשֵׁיהוֹן. צְפַר זְמַן תִּינְייָן וְעָלוּן כּוּלְהוֹן כְּחָדָא. אֲמַר. כָּל־דְּמַטֵּי יַחְכּוּם זוּגֵיהּ. וְטָעָנוּנוּן וְאָֽזְלוּן וְצַלְבוּנוּן. הָדָא הִיא דְּתַנִּינָן. מַעֲשֶׂה בְשִׁמְעוּן בֶּן שֶׁטַח שֶׁתָּלָה נָשִׁים בְּאַשְׁקְלוֹן. [אָֽמְרוּ. שְׁמוֹנִים נָשִׁים תָּלָה. וְאֵין דָּנִין שְׁנַיִם בְּיוֹם אֶחָד. אֶלָּא שֶׁהָֽיְתָה הַשָּׁעָה צְרִיכָה לְכָךְ.]
What happened in Ascalon supports him who said, Simeon ben Sheṭaḥ was president. Two pious men were in Ascalon. They ate together, drank together, and studied Torah together. One of them died, and nobody attended his funeral. The son of Ma’yan the publican died; the entire city stopped working to attend his funeral. The other pious man started crying and said woe, do the haters of Israel have no hope? He was shown in a dream that it was said to him, do not denigrate your Master’s children. This one committed one sin and died with it, the other one did one good deed and died with it. What sin did this pious man commit? Far be it that he committed a sin, but once he put on his head phylacteries before his arm phylacteries. What good deed did the son of publican Ma’yan do? Far be it that he ever committed a good deed, but once he prepared a breakfast for the city council but they did not come to eat it. He said, let the poor eat it, so it should not go to waste. Some say, he was walking in the street when a loaf fell down from him and a poor person picked it up. He did not say anything [in order not to embarrass him]. After days this pious man saw his comrade the pious walking in gardens, in orchards, at water sources, and he saw the son of Ma’yan the publican with his tongue out on the river bank trying in vain to reach the water. He also saw Miriam, Onion-leaf’s daughter. Rebbi Eleazar bar Yose said, she was hanging on her breast nipples. Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, the hinge of Hell’s door was fixed in her ear. He asked them, why? They told him, because she fasted and made herself famous. Some say, she fasted one day and was dissolute two. He asked them for how long is she in this state? They told him, until Simeon ben Shetah comes, when we shall remove it from her ear and put it in his ear. [He asked them, and why?] They told him, because he said, that if I would be elected Patriarch, I would kill sorcerers. But now he was made Patriarch and he did not kill them. In fact, there are eighty women sorcerers in the cave of Ascalon who hurt the world. You shall go and tell him! He told them, I am afraid that since he is Patriarch he will not believe me. They told him, if he will believe you it will be good. In case that he will not believe you, perform a sign in front of him: put your hand on an eye and take it out, put it back and it will be back. He went and told him. He wanted to perform [the miracle] before him, but he told him, I know that you are a pious person; more than that you could do. In fact, I never spoke it with my mouth even though I intended so in my thoughts. Immediately Simeon ben Shetaḥ went on a stormy day and took with him eighty select men. He gave them eighty clean garments, put them in eighty new amphoras, and put them on them upside down. He told them, when I whistle once, put on your garments. When I whistle for the second time, come in all of you together. When you enter, each of you shall choose one and lift her from the ground, since the nature of this sorcery is that separated from the earth it cannot do anything. He went and stood at the entrance to the cave. He said אוים, אוים, open for me, I am one of yours. They asked, how did you come here on such a day? He said, I was walking between the raindrops. They asked him, what do you want to do here? He said, to learn and to teach. Every one should make what he is able to. One of them said what she said and produced bread. One of them said what she said and produced meat. One of them said what she said and produced dishes. One said what she said and produced wine. They asked him, what can you do? He told them, when I whistle twice, I shall bring here eighty select men for your pleasure and entertainment. They told him, that is what we desire. When he whistled the first time, they put on their garments; when he whistled for the second time, they all entered together. He said, every one who comes shall select his mate. They lifted them, took them away, and crucified them. That is what we have stated: “It happened that Simeon ben Shetaḥ hanged women in Ascalon. [They said, he hanged eighty women but one does not try two on the same day.” But the hour needed it.]
Mishnah, Seder Nezikin, Mishnah Sanhedrin, Page 6, Line 4:
בֵּית הַסְּקִילָה הָיָה גָבוֹהַּ שְׁתֵּי קוֹמוֹת. אֶחָד מִן הָעֵדִים דּוֹחֲפוֹ עַל מָתְנָיו. נֶהְפַּךְ עַל לִבּוֹ, הוֹפְכוֹ עַל מָתְנָיו. אִם מֵת בָּהּ, יָצָא. וְאִם לָאו, הַשֵּׁנִי נוֹטֵל אֶת הָאֶבֶן וְנוֹתְנָהּ עַל לִבּוֹ. אִם מֵת בָּהּ, יָצָא. וְאִם לָאו, רְגִימָתוֹ בְכָל יִשְׂרָאֵל, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים יז) יַד הָעֵדִים תִּהְיֶה בּוֹ בָרִאשֹׁנָה לַהֲמִיתוֹ וְיַד כָּל הָעָם בָּאַחֲרֹנָה. כָּל הַנִּסְקָלִין נִתְלִין, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, אֵינוֹ נִתְלֶה אֶלָּא הַמְגַדֵּף וְהָעוֹבֵד עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה. הָאִישׁ תּוֹלִין אוֹתוֹ פָּנָיו כְּלַפֵּי הָעָם, וְהָאִשָּׁה פָּנֶיהָ כְלַפֵּי הָעֵץ, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, הָאִישׁ נִתְלֶה וְאֵין הָאִשָּׁה נִתְלֵית. אָמַר לָהֶן רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, וַהֲלֹא שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן שָׁטָח תָּלָה נָשִׁים בְּאַשְׁקְלוֹן. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, שְׁמֹנִים נָשִׁים תָּלָה, וְאֵין דָּנִין שְׁנַיִם בְּיוֹם אֶחָד. כֵּיצַד תּוֹלִין אוֹתוֹ, מְשַׁקְּעִין אֶת הַקּוֹרָה בָאָרֶץ וְהָעֵץ יוֹצֵא מִמֶּנָּה, וּמַקִּיף שְׁתֵּי יָדָיו זוֹ עַל גַּבֵּי זוֹ וְתוֹלֶה אוֹתוֹ. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, הַקּוֹרָה מֻטָּה עַל הַכֹּתֶל, וְתוֹלֶה אוֹתוֹ כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁהַטַּבָּחִין עוֹשִׂין. וּמַתִּירִין אוֹתוֹ מִיָּד. וְאִם לָן, עוֹבֵר עָלָיו בְּלֹא תַעֲשֶׂה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים כא) לֹא תָלִין נִבְלָתוֹ עַל הָעֵץ כִּי קָבוֹר תִּקְבְּרֶנּוּ כִּי קִלְלַת אֱלֹהִים תָּלוּי וְגוֹ’. כְּלוֹמַר, מִפְּנֵי מָה זֶה תָלוּי, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁבֵּרַךְ אֶת הַשֵּׁם, וְנִמְצָא שֵׁם שָׁמַיִם מִתְחַלֵּל:
The place of stoning from which the condemned man is pushed to his death is a platform twice the height of an ordinary person. He is made to stand at the edge of the platform, and then one of the witnesses who testified against him pushes him down by the hips, so that he falls face up onto the ground. If he turned over onto his chest, with his face downward, the witness turns him over onto his hips. And if he dies through this fall to the ground, the obligation to stone the transgressor is fulfilled. And if the condemned man does not die from his fall, the second witness takes the stone that has been prepared for this task and places, i.e., casts, it on his chest. And if he dies with the casting of this first stone, the obligation to stone the transgressor is fulfilled. And if he does not die with the casting of this stone, then his stoning is completed by all of the Jewish people, i.e., by all the people who assembled for the execution, as it is stated: “The hand of the witnesses shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterward the hand of all the people” (Deuteronomy 17:7). The corpses of all those who are stoned are hung after their death; this is the statement of Rabbi Eliezer. And the Rabbis say: Only the corpse of the blasphemer, who has cursed God, and the corpse of the idol worshipper are hung. The corpse of a man is hung facing the people, but the corpse of a woman, out of modesty, is hung with facing the tree; this is the statement of Rabbi Eliezer. And the Rabbis say: the corpse of a man is hung, but the corpse of a woman is not hung. Rabbi Eliezer said to the Rabbis: Did Shimon ben Shataḥ not hang in Ashkelon women who were found guilty of witchcraft, proving that the corpse of a woman who is executed is also hung? They said to him: No proof can be brought from here, as he hanged eighty women on that day, and the halakha is that the same court may not judge even two people charged with capital transgressions on the same day. It is therefore clear that he was not acting in accordance with Torah law, but rather his execution of the eighty women was an extraordinary punishment necessitated by unusually pressing circumstances. How do they hang the corpse of one who was put to death by stoning? They sink a post into the earth with a piece of wood jutting out, forming a T-shaped structure. And the court appointee then places the dead man’s two hands one upon the other, ties them, and hangs him by his hands. Rabbi Yosei says: The post is not sunk into the ground; rather, it leans against a wall, and he hangs the corpse on it the way that butchers do with meat. The dead man hangs there for only a very short time, and then they immediately untie him. And if he was left hanging overnight, a prohibition is transgressed, as it is stated: “His body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but you shall bury him that day, for he that is hung is a curse of God” (Deuteronomy 21:23). That is to say: Were the corpse left hanging on the tree overnight, people would ask: For what reason was this one hung after he was put to death? They would be answered: Because he blessed God, a euphemism for blasphemy. And therefore the name of Heaven would be desecrated were the dead man’s corpse to remain hanging, reminding everybody of his transgression.
(3/8) Shimon ben Shatach wrongly testifying against his own son
This was done in retaliation for executing the 80 witches by their relatives, as Rashi’s commentary clarifies.
Babylonian Talmud, Seder Nezikin, Sanhedrin, Page 44b:13:
וְכִי הָדְרִי בְּהוּ, מַאי הָוֵי? כֵּיוָן שֶׁהִגִּיד, שׁוּב אֵינוֹ חוֹזֵר וּמַגִּיד! לָא צְרִיכָא, דְּאַף עַל גַּב דְּקָא יָהֲבִי טַעְמָא לְמִילְּתַיְיהוּ, כִּי הָהוּא מַעֲשֶׂה דְּבַעְיָא מֹכְסָא.
The Gemara asks: Even if the witnesses retracted their testimony, what of it? It is still clear that the condemned man is to be executed, as the halakha is that once a witness has stated his testimony, he may not then state a revision of that testimony. In other words, a witness’s retraction of his testimony has no validity. The Gemara answers: No, it is necessary to state that the condemned man is executed even when the witnesses retracted their testimony and gave an explanation for having lied in their initial statement. This is like that incident involving Ba’aya the tax collector, where it was discovered that witnesses had falsely accused the son of Rabbi Shimon ben Shataḥ in revenge for the son’s having sentenced to death for sorcery the witnesses’ relatives.
Rashi on Babylonian Talmud, Seder Nezikin, Sanhedrin, Page 44b:13:
כיון שהגיד שוב אינו חוזר ומגיד - דבר המכחיש את הראשון דכתיב (ויקרא ה) אם לא יגיד אהגדה קמייתא קפיד קרא ואפי’ מיחשדינהו נמי לא מיבעי דאיכא למימר דהאי דהדרי בהו דאמרי מה לנו לחוב בדמו:
דיהבי טעמא למילתייהו - מפני שנאה פלונית היינו שונאים אותו:
דבעיא מכסא - מעשה במוכס אחד ישראל רשע אחד שמת ובו ביום מת אדם גדול בעיר ובאו כל בני העיר ונתעסקו במטתו וקרובי אותו מוכס הוציאו גם את מטת המוכס אחריו וקפצו עליהם אויבים והניחו המטות וברחו והיה שם תלמיד אחד שישב לו עם מטת רבו לאחר זמן חזרו גדולי העיר לקבור את החכם ונתחלפ’ להם מטתו בשל מוכס והיה אותו תלמיד צועק ולא הועיל וקרובי המוכס קברו את החכם ונצטער בה אותו תלמיד מאד מה חטא גרם ליקבר זה בבזיון ומה זכה אותו רשע ליקבר בכבוד גדול כזה נראה לו רבו בחלום ואמר לו אל תצטער בא ואראך בכבודי בגן עדן בכבוד גדול ובא ואראך אותו האיש בגיהנם וציר של פתח גיהנם סובב באזניו אבל פעם אחת שמעתי בגנות תלמידי חכמים ולא מחיתי ולכך נענשתי וזה פעם אחת הכין סעודה לשר העיר ולא בא שר העיר וחילקה לעניים וזה היה שכרו אמר אותו תלמיד עד מתי יהא אותו האיש נדון בדין קשה אמר לו עד שימות שמעון בן שטח ויכנס תחתיו אמר לו למה אמר לו מפני נשים מכשפניות ישראליות שיש באשקלון ואינו עושה בהן דין למחר סיפר אותו תלמיד דברים לשמעון בן שטח מה עשה כינס שמונים בחורים בעלי קומה והיה אותו היום יום גשמים ונתן כד גדולה ביד כל אחד ואחד וקיפל טלית בתוכם ואמר להן הזהרו בהן שהן שמונים ובשעה שתכנסו יגביה איש אחת מהן מן הארץ ושוב אין מכשפות שולטות בכם ואם לאו לא נוכל להם הלך לו שמעון בן שטח לטרקלין שלהם והניח הבחורים מבחוץ אמרו לו מי אתה אמר להן מכשף אני ולנסותכם בכשפים באתי אמרו לו ומה כשפים בידך אמר להן יכולני להביא לכם שמונים בחורים עטופי טליתות נגובות ואע”פ שהוא יום גשמים אמרו לו הנראה יצא לחוץ ורמז להם הוציאו הטליתות מן הכדים ונתעטפו בהן ונכנסו ואחז כל אחד את אחת מהן והגביה ויכלו להם והוציאום ותלאום כולם ונתקנאו קרוביהם בדבר ובאו שנים מהם וכוונו דבריהם והעידו על בנו של שמעון בן שטח חיוב מיתה ונגמר דינו וכשהיה יוצא ליסקל אמר אם יש בי עון זה לא תהא מיתתי כפרה לי ואם אינו כן תהא מיתתי כפרה על כל עונותי וקולר תלוי בצואר עדים ושמעו אלו וחזרו בהם ונתנו טעם לדבריהם מחמת שנאת הנשים ואעפ”כ לא נפטר:
Of Bayah the tax-collector - It once happened that Jewish tax-farmer, evil, and a great scholar died on the same day and in the same place. All the people assembled to attend the burial of the great scholar; at the same time the relatives of the tax-farmer brought his bier for burial. Enemies attacked the group, so they all dropped both biers and ran. One student however stayed there guarding the body of his rabbi. Some time later the town dignitaries returned to resume the burial of the great scholar, but the biers of the rabbi and the tax-farmer somehow got exchanged and the protests of the student were of no avail. So the relatives of the tax-farmer buried the great rabbi, which greatly distressed the student; nor could he explain to himself what great sin had caused the one to be buried in such a shameful way and what great merit in the other had brought about his interment with such honor. His rabbi appeared to him in a dream and told him not to be distressed. “Come and let me show you how greatly I am honored in paradise and let me also show you that man in hell with the hinges of the gates of hell turning through his ears. Once I heard people calumniating the sages and did not protest (and that is why I was punished); he once prepared a banquet in honor of a city dignitary who did not show up, and he distributed the food to the poor (and that is why he was rewarded).” The student asked how long the poor man was doomed to suffer such difficult judgment. “Until Shimeon ben Shatach dies,” was the reply, “who will then replace him!” “Why?” asked the student; “Because there are Jewish women in Ashkelon who practice witchcraft and he does not subject them to judgment.” The following day the student related his dream to Shimeon ben Shatach. The latter assembled eighty tall young men and distributed to each of them a jar with a cloak wrapped up inside (it was a rainy day). He also told them to make sure that they were always eighty in number. “When you come inside,” he said, “one of you must raise his jar from the ground; from that moment the witches will have no further hold over you; if that does not work then we can never beat them.” Shimeon ben Shatach went into the witches’ hall and left the young men outside. When the witches asked him who he was he replied that he was a wizard who had come to test them with his wizardry. “What tricks can you do?” they asked. “Despite the fact that it is raining today I can produce eighty young men with dry talitot!” “Show us!” He went outside and beckoned the young men inside. They removed the talitot from the jars, put them on, and came in. They took each man one witch and carried them, and were able to defeat them, and hung them all up. The relatives of the witches were incensed. Two of them came forward and perjured themselves by testifying that Shimeon ben-Shatach’s son had committed some crime that was punishable by death. He was condemned to death. As he was being taken out to be stoned he said, “If I am guilty of this crime may my death bring me atonement, and if I am innocent may it atone for all my other sins and the responsibility for my death will be on the shoulders of the witnesses.” When the perjurers heard this they recanted their testimony and explained that they had only acted because of their animosity at the fate of their women-folk, and so he wasn’t killed.
Jerusalem Talmud, Seder Nezikin, Masekhet Sanhderin, Chapter 6, Halakha 3:5:
שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן שֶׁטַח הָיוּ יָדָיו חֲמוּמוֹת. אֲתַא סִיעַת לֵיצָנִין אָֽמְרֵי. הֲבוּ עֵצָה נִיסְהוֹד עַל בְּרֵיהּ וְנִיקְטְלִינֵיהּ. אַסְהִידוּ עֲלוֹי. וְנִגְמַר דִּינוֹ לֵיהָרֵג. מִי נְפַק לְמִיתְקַטְּלָא אָֽמְרֵי לֵיהּ. מָרִי שִׁיקְרִין אֲנָן. בְּעָא אֲבוֹי מַחְזַרְתֵּיהּ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ. אַבָּא. אִם בִּיקַשְׁתָּה לָבוֹא תְשׁוּעָה עַל יָדָךְ עֲשֵׂה אוֹתִי כְאֶסְקוֹפָּה.
Simeon ben Sheṭaḥ’s hands were hot [He was quick in persecuting persons not conforming to pharisaic standards (cf. H. Graetz, Geschichte der Juden 3–1, p. 146).]. There came a group of scoffers who said, let us take counsel, testify against his son, and kill him. They testified against him. He was sentenced to be executed. When he was taken to be killed, they told him, our Master, we are liars [They could confess their perjury with impunity. By Sadducee standards, a false witness in a capital case cannot be punished as long as the victim was not executed. By Pharisaic standards, no self-incrimination is admissible in court.]. His father wanted to return him [To have the conviction overturned, Sanhedrin 6:1:2-3 > Halakhah 1.]; he told him, my father, if you want that salvation come through you [By strict pharisaic (rabbinical) rules, witnesses cannot change their story once the phase of testimony was concluded and deliberations started (Bava mesia’ 1:2 Note 30; Ševi’it 10:5 Note 96). By the strict letter of the law, there was no ground for reconsideration.], treat me as a target.
(4/8) Someone being executed during the days of the Geeks for riding a horse on Shabbos
Babylonian Talmud, Seder Nashim, Yevamot, Page 90b:10:
תָּא שְׁמַע, אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב: שָׁמַעְתִּי שֶׁבֵּית דִּין מַכִּין וְעוֹנְשִׁין שֶׁלֹּא מִן הַתּוֹרָה, וְלֹא לַעֲבוֹר עַל דִּבְרֵי תוֹרָה, אֶלָּא לַעֲשׂוֹת סְיָיג לַתּוֹרָה. וּמַעֲשֶׂה בְּאָדָם אֶחָד שֶׁרָכַב עַל סוּס בַּשַּׁבָּת בִּימֵי יְוָנִים — וֶהֱבִיאוּהוּ לְבֵית דִּין וּסְקָלוּהוּ, לֹא מִפְּנֵי שֶׁרָאוּי לְכָךְ, אֶלָּא שֶׁהַשָּׁעָה צְרִיכָה לְכָךְ.
The Gemara cites yet another relevant source. Come and hear, as Rabbi Elazar ben Ya’akov said: I have heard that the reason why the court may administer lashes and punish not by Torah law, i.e., in response to actions for which one is not liable to receive punishment by Torah law, is not so as to transgress matters of Torah, but to establish a safeguard for the Torah. And an example of this is an incident involving a certain person who rode on a horse on Shabbat in the days of the Greeks, an act that is prohibited by rabbinic law, and they brought him to the court and they stoned him as a desecrator of Shabbat. They did so not because he was deserving of this, as riding a horse is not punishable by stoning by Torah law, but because the hour required it, as at that time Jews were negligent with regard to Shabbat observance.
Babylonian Talmud, Seder Nezikin, Sanhedrin, Page 46a:12:
וּמַעֲשֶׂה בְּאֶחָד שֶׁרָכַב עַל סוּס בְּשַׁבָּת בִּימֵי יְוָנִים, וֶהֱבִיאוּהוּ לְבֵית דִּין וּסְקָלוּהוּ, לֹא מִפְּנֵי שֶׁרָאוּי לְכָךְ, אֶלָּא שֶׁהַשָּׁעָה צְרִיכָה לְכָךְ. שׁוּב מַעֲשֶׂה בְּאָדָם אֶחָד שֶׁהֵטִיחַ אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ תַּחַת הַתְּאֵנָה, וֶהֱבִיאוּהוּ לְבֵית דִּין וְהִלְקוּהוּ, לֹא מִפְּנֵי שֶׁרָאוּי לְכָךְ, אֶלָּא שֶׁהַשָּׁעָה צְרִיכָה לְכָךְ.
And an incident occurred involving one who rode a horse on Shabbat during the days of the Greeks, and they brought him to court and stoned him, not because he deserved that punishment, as riding a horse on Shabbat is forbidden only by rabbinic decree, but because the hour required it, as people had become lax in their observance of Shabbat and therefore it became necessary to impose the severe punishment for a relatively minor offense. Another incident occurred involving a man who engaged in intercourse with his wife in public under a fig tree, and they brought him to court and flogged him, not because that punishment was fitting for him, as such conduct is not forbidden by the Torah, but because the hour required it. People had become remiss in matters of modesty; therefore, stringent measures had to be taken to rectify the situation.
(5/8) Yeshu Hanotrzri (Jesus the Nazarene) who was executed on Erev Pesach (and his disciples)
Note that there are three opinions: This is the account of Jesus, this is the account of someone else, and that this is the account of Jesus, but through mouth to mouth transmissions, it ended up with lots of elements from other people. Yeshu was such a common name, and even Yeshu the Nazarene could not be referring to the same person as the New Testament leader.
It is also said that the Talmud should be telling the story of another Yeshu in Shabbat 104b and Sanhedrin 67a, since the 1st century historian Josephus recorded that Yeshua was crucified, even in the unaltered Arabic manuscripts.
Babylonian Talmud, Seder Nezikin, Sanhedrin, Page 43a:20-26:
וְכָרוֹז יוֹצֵא לְפָנָיו. לְפָנָיו – אִין, מֵעִיקָּרָא – לָא. וְהָתַנְיָא: בְּעֶרֶב הַפֶּסַח תְּלָאוּהוּ לְיֵשׁוּ הַנּוֹצְרִי, וְהַכָּרוֹז יוֹצֵא לְפָנָיו אַרְבָּעִים יוֹם: ״יֵשׁוּ הַנּוֹצְרִי יוֹצֵא לִיסָּקֵל עַל שֶׁכִּישֵּׁף וְהֵסִית וְהִדִּיחַ אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל. כׇּל מִי שֶׁיּוֹדֵעַ לוֹ זְכוּת יָבוֹא וִילַמֵּד עָלָיו״. וְלֹא מָצְאוּ לוֹ זְכוּת, וּתְלָאוּהוּ בְּעֶרֶב הַפֶּסַח.
The mishna teaches that a crier goes out before the condemned man. This indicates that it is only before him, i.e., while he is being led to his execution, that yes, the crier goes out, but from the outset, before the accused is convicted, he does not go out. The Gemara raises a difficulty: But isn’t it taught in a baraita: On Passover Eve they hung the corpse of Jesus the Nazarene after they killed him by way of stoning. And a crier went out before him for forty days, publicly proclaiming: Jesus the Nazarene is going out to be stoned because he practiced sorcery, incited people to idol worship, and led the Jewish people astray. Anyone who knows of a reason to acquit him should come forward and teach it on his behalf. And the court did not find a reason to acquit him, and so they stoned him and hung his corpse on Passover eve.
אָמַר עוּלָּא: וְתִסְבְּרָא? יֵשׁוּ הַנּוֹצְרִי בַּר הַפּוֹכֵי זְכוּת הוּא? מֵסִית הוּא, וְרַחֲמָנָא אָמַר: ״לֹא תַחְמֹל וְלֹא תְכַסֶּה עָלָיו!״ אֶלָּא שָׁאנֵי יֵשׁוּ, דְּקָרוֹב לְמַלְכוּת הֲוָה.
Ulla said: And how can you understand this proof? Was Jesus the Nazarene worthy of conducting a search for a reason to acquit him? He was an inciter to idol worship, and the Merciful One states with regard to an inciter to idol worship: “Neither shall you spare, neither shall you conceal him” (Deuteronomy 13:9). Rather, Jesus was different, as he had close ties with the government, and the gentile authorities were interested in his acquittal. Consequently, the court gave him every opportunity to clear himself, so that it could not be claimed that he was falsely convicted.
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: חֲמִשָּׁה תַּלְמִידִים הָיוּ לוֹ לְיֵשׁוּ הַנּוֹצְרִי – מַתַּאי, נַקַּאי, נֶצֶר, וּבוּנִי, וְתוֹדָה. אַתְיוּהּ לְמַתַּי. אֲמַר לְהוּ: מַתַּי יֵהָרֵג? הָכְתִיב ״מַתַּי אָבוֹא וְאֵרָאֶה פְּנֵי אֱלֹהִים״? אָמְרוּ לוֹ: אִין, מַתַּי יֵהָרֵג, דִּכְתִיב: ״מָתַי יָמוּת וְאָבַד שְׁמוֹ״.
Apropos the trial of Jesus, the Gemara cites another baraita, where the Sages taught: Jesus the Nazarene had five disciples: Mattai, Nakai, Netzer, Buni, and Toda. They brought Mattai in to stand trial. Mattai said to the judges: Shall Mattai be executed? But isn’t it written: “When [matai] shall I come and appear before God?” (Psalms 42:3). Mattai claimed that this verse alludes to the fact he is righteous. They said to him: Yes, Mattai shall be executed, as it is written: “When [matai] shall he die, and his name perish?” (Psalms 41:6).
אַתְיוּהּ לְנַקַּאי. אֲמַר לְהוּ: נַקַּאי יֵהָרֵג? הָכְתִיב ״וְנָקִי וְצַדִּיק אַל תַּהֲרֹג״? אָמְרוּ לוֹ: אִין, נַקַּאי יֵהָרֵג, דִּכְתִיב: ״בַּמִּסְתָּרִים יַהֲרֹג נָקִי״.
Then they brought Nakai in to stand trial. Nakai said to the judges: Shall Nakai be executed? But isn’t it written: “And the innocent [naki] and righteous you shall not slay” (Exodus 23:7)? They said to him: Yes, Nakai shall be executed, as it is written: “In secret places he kills the innocent [naki]” (Psalms 10:8).
אַתְיוּהּ לְנֶצֶר. אָמַר: נֶצֶר יֵהָרֵג? הָכְתִיב ״וְנֵצֶר מִשׇּׁרָשָׁיו יִפְרֶה״? אָמְרוּ לוֹ: אִין, נֶצֶר יֵהָרֵג, דִּכְתִיב: ״וְאַתָּה הׇשְׁלַכְתָּ מִקִּבְרְךָ כְּנֵצֶר נִתְעָב״.
Then they brought Netzer in to stand trial. He said to the judges: Shall Netzer be executed? But isn’t it written: “And a branch [netzer] shall grow out of his roots” (Isaiah 11:1)? They said to him: Yes, Netzer shall be executed, as it is written: “But you are cast out of your grave like an abhorred branch [netzer]” (Isaiah 14:19).
אַתְיוּהּ לְבוּנִי. אָמַר: בּוּנִי יֵהָרֵג? הָכְתִיב ״בְּנִי בְכֹרִי יִשְׂרָאֵל״! אָמְרוּ לוֹ: אִין, בּוּנִי יֵהָרֵג, דִּכְתִיב: ״הִנֵּה אָנֹכִי הוֹרֵג אֶת בִּנְךָ בְּכֹרֶךָ״.
Then they brought Buni in to stand trial. Buni said to the judges: Shall Buni be executed? But isn’t it written: “My firstborn son [beni] is Israel” (Exodus 4:22)? They said to him: Yes, Buni shall be executed, as it is written: “Behold, I shall kill your firstborn son [binkha]” (Exodus 4:23).
אַתְיוּהּ לְתוֹדָה. אָמַר: תּוֹדָה יֵהָרֵג? הָכְתִיב ״מִזְמוֹר לְתוֹדָה״? אָמְרוּ לוֹ: אִין, תּוֹדָה יֵהָרֵג, דִּכְתִיב: ״זֹבֵחַ תּוֹדָה יְכַבְּדָנְנִי״.
Then they brought Toda in to stand trial. Toda said to the judges: Shall Toda be executed? But isn’t it written: “A psalm of thanksgiving [toda]” (Psalms 100:1)? They said to him: Yes, Toda shall be executed, as it is written: “Whoever slaughters a thanks-offering [toda] honors Me” (Psalms 50:23).
From another blog article on this (since it seems senseless):
The anachronism is great, since the Roman occupation began in the 63 BCE, and Alexander Yannai reigned until the 76 BCE, and as we know, the Talmud says that Yeshu lived in the days of Alexander Yannai, but it then says that his father was a Roman soldier. Not happy with this, they also say that his Jewish father was Pappos ben Yehuda, who actually lived in the days of Rabbi Akiva’s martyrdom! that is, the 135 CE (Berakhot 61b). Please, someone explain to me how the father of Yeshu live 300 years after Yeshu himself was even born. If this is not anachronistic I don’t know what else will be more fun:
The fun on Yeshu doesn’t end here. In a second Baraitha (Sanhedrin 43a) it says he had five disciple (obviously the Gospels say he had 12, which he chose by himself in accordance to the 12 tribes, and this was also similar to what the Qumran community did with their council of 12 members). The Baraitha is ancient, but then there’s an anonymous commentary in Amoraic-period Aramaic. The five disciples are sentenced to death through a biblical gymnastic that cannot and is not historical, nor reliable. How can the Sanhedrin have fun on people in the middle of a death penalty trial? How could they execute them all together at the same time, which is against hallakha? Did they judge them by the biblical meaning of their names as the text says? In fact, did Judaism sentence to death to those who belonged to a different sect? It seems to me entire story is just a manner to have fun with how Christians twist verses from Scripture in order to apply them to Yeshua, and this seems to be the teaching here, that without a proper foundation on Scripture and hermeneutics one can deduce almost anything from any Biblical verse.
So from all of this we know that this Baraitha originated when Christianity had already began to praise their “Jesus” as a god, and not earlier. At that moment, when Christianity began to worship Jesus, the Tannaim turned this character called Yeshu into the cosmic or metaphoric leader that led Christianity astray. They were “executing him” now, in their present, retrospectively, so in a sense the text is real, it tells the truth, it’s just not a historical truth. His teachings were now enticing people to worship a man, and therefore, all of his miracles were displaced outside of the Jewish Pharisaic framework, and therefore, they could be nothing but sorcery. Do you see the logic here?
Babylonian Talmud, Seder Nezikin, Sanhderin, Page 67a:14-15:
ben Setada is thought to be Jesus, and in Aramaic, Miriam who braided womens’ hair (Miriam megadla se’ar neshia) sounds a lot like Mary Magdalene, which makes people see parallels. But the story doesn’t really add up.
וְכֵן עָשׂוּ לְבֶן סָטָדָא בְּלוֹד, וּתְלָאוּהוּ בְּעֶרֶב הַפֶּסַח.
And the court did the same to an inciter named ben Setada, from the city of Lod, and they hanged him on Passover eve.
בֶּן סָטָדָא? בֶּן פַּנְדִּירָא הוּא! אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: בַּעַל סָטָדָא, בּוֹעֵל פַּנְדִּירָא. בַּעַל? פַּפּוּס בֶּן יְהוּדָה הוּא! אֶלָּא, אִמּוֹ סָטָדָא. אִמּוֹ? מִרְיָם מְגַדְּלָא נְשַׁיָּא הֲוַאי! כִּדְאָמְרִי בְּפוּמְבְּדִיתָא: ״סְטָת דָּא מִבַּעְלַהּ״.
The Gemara asks: Why did they call him ben Setada, when he was the son of Pandeira? Rav Ḥisda says: Perhaps his mother’s husband, who acted as his father, was named Setada, but his mother’s paramour, who fathered this mamzer, was named Pandeira. The Gemara challenges: But his mother’s husband was Pappos ben Yehuda, not Setada. Rather, perhaps his mother was named Setada, and he was named ben Setada after her. The Gemara challenges: But his mother was Miriam, who braided women’s hair. The Gemara explains: That is not a contradiction; Setada was merely a nickname, as they say in Pumbedita: This one strayed [setat da] from her husband.
More References
Babylonian Talmud, Seder Nezikin, Sanhedrin, Page 107b:8:
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: לְעוֹלָם תְּהֵא שְׂמֹאל דּוֹחָה וְיָמִין מְקָרֶבֶת, לֹא כֶּאֱלִישָׁע שֶׁדְּחָפוֹ לְגֵחֲזִי בִּשְׁתֵּי יָדַיִם, וְלֹא כִּיהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן פְּרַחְיָה שֶׁדְּחָפוֹ לְיֵשׁוּ הַנּוֹצְרִי בִּשְׁתֵּי יָדַיִם.
The Sages taught: Always have the left hand drive sinners away and the right draw them near, so that the sinner will not totally despair of atonement. This is unlike Elisha, who pushed away Gehazi with his two hands and caused him to lose his share in the World-to-Come, and unlike Yehoshua ben Peraḥya, who pushed away Jesus the Nazarene with his two hands.
Babylonian Talmud, Seder Nezikin, Sanhedrin, 107b:12-14:
יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן פְּרַחְיָה מַאי הִיא? כִּדְקַטְלִינְהוּ יַנַּאי מַלְכָּא לְרַבָּנַן, אֲזַל יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן פְּרַחְיָה וְיֵשׁוּ לַאֲלֶכְּסַנְדְּרִיָּא שֶׁל מִצְרַיִם. כִּי הֲוָה שְׁלָמָא, שְׁלַח לֵיהּ שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן שָׁטַח: מִינִּי יְרוּשָׁלַיִם עִיר הַקֹּדֶשׁ לִיכִי אָלֶכְּסַנְדְּרִיָּה שֶׁל מִצְרַיִם, אֲחוֹתִי: בַּעֲלִי שָׁרוּי בְּתוֹכֵךְ וְאָנֹכִי יוֹשֶׁבֶת שׁוֹמֵמָה.
§ What is the incident involving Yehoshua ben Peraḥya? The Gemara relates: When King Yannai was killing the Sages, Yehoshua ben Peraḥya and Jesus, his student, went to Alexandria of Egypt. When there was peace between King Yannai and the Sages, Shimon ben Shataḥ sent a message to Yehoshua ben Peraḥya: From me, Jerusalem, the holy city, to you, Alexandria of Egypt: My sister, my husband is located among you and I sit desolate. The head of the Sages of Israel is out of the country and Jerusalem requires his return.
קָם, אֲתָא, וְאִתְרְמִי לֵיהּ הָהוּא אוּשְׁפִּיזָא. עֲבַדוּ לֵיהּ יְקָרָא טוּבָא. אֲמַר: כַּמָּה יָפָה אַכְסַנְיָא זוֹ! אֲמַר לֵיהּ: רַבִּי, עֵינֶיהָ טְרוּטוֹת. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: רָשָׁע! בְּכָךְ אַתָּה עוֹסֵק? אַפֵּיק אַרְבַּע מְאָה שִׁיפּוּרֵי וְשַׁמְּתֵיהּ.
Yehoshua ben Peraḥya understood the message, arose, came, and happened to arrive at a certain inn on the way to Jerusalem. They treated him with great honor. Yehoshua ben Peraḥya said: How beautiful is this inn. Jesus, his student, said to him: But my teacher, the eyes of the innkeeper’s wife are narrow [terutot]. Yehoshua ben Peraḥya said to him: Wicked one! Do you involve yourself with regard to that matter, the appearance of a married woman? He produced four hundred shofarot and ostracized him.
אֲתָא לְקַמֵּיהּ כַּמָּה זִימְנִין, אֲמַר לֵיהּ: קַבְּלָן! לָא הָוֵי קָא מַשְׁגַּח בֵּיהּ. יוֹמָא חַד הֲוָה קָא קָרֵי קְרִיאַת שְׁמַע, אֲתָא לְקַמֵּיהּ. סָבַר לְקַבּוֹלֵי, אַחְוִי לֵיהּ בִּידֵיהּ. הוּא סָבַר: מִידְחָא דָּחֵי לִי. אֲזַל זְקַף לְבֵינְתָּא וְהִשְׁתַּחֲוָה לָהּ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: הֲדַר בָּךְ! אֲמַר לֵיהּ: כָּךְ מְקוּבְּלַנִי מִמְּךָ: כָּל הַחוֹטֵא וּמַחְטִיא אֶת הָרַבִּים אֵין מַסְפִּיקִין בְּיָדוֹ לַעֲשׂוֹת תְּשׁוּבָה. וְאָמַר מָר: יֵשׁוּ כִּישֵּׁף וְהֵסִית וְהִדִּיחַ אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל.
Jesus came before Yehoshua ben Peraḥya several times and said to him: Accept our, i.e., my, repentance. Yehoshua ben Peraḥya took no notice of him. One day Yehoshua ben Peraḥya was reciting Shema and Jesus came before him with the same request. Yehoshua ben Peraḥya intended to accept his request, and signaled him with his hand to wait until he completed his prayer. Jesus did not understand the signal and thought: He is driving me away. He went and stood a brick upright to serve as an idol and he bowed to it. Yehoshua ben Peraḥya then said to Jesus: Repent. Jesus said to him: This is the tradition that I received from you: Whoever sins and causes the masses to sin is not given the opportunity to repent. And the Master says: Jesus performed sorcery, incited Jews to engage in idolatry, and led Israel astray. Had Yehoshua ben Peraḥya not caused him to despair of atonement, he would not have taken the path of evil.
Babylonian Talmud, Seder Moed, Shabbat, Page 104:5:
הַמְסָרֵט עַל בְּשָׂרוֹ. תַּנְיָא, אָמַר לָהֶן רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר לַחֲכָמִים: וַהֲלֹא בֶּן סָטָדָא הוֹצִיא כְּשָׁפִים מִמִּצְרַיִם בִּסְרִיטָה שֶׁעַל בְּשָׂרוֹ? אָמְרוּ לוֹ: שׁוֹטֶה הָיָה, וְאֵין מְבִיאִין רְאָיָה מִן הַשּׁוֹטִים. ״בֶּן סָטָדָא״? בֶּן פַּנְדִּירָא הוּא! אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: בַּעַל ״סָטָדָא״, בּוֹעֵל ״פַּנְדִּירָא״. בַּעַל פַּפּוּס בֶּן יְהוּדָה הוּא? אֶלָּא אִמּוֹ ״סָטָדָא״. אִמּוֹ מִרְיָם מְגַדְּלָא שְׂעַר נְשַׁיָּא הֲוַאי? אֶלָּא כִּדְאָמְרִי בְּפוּמְבְּדִיתָא: סְטָת דָּא מִבַּעְלַהּ.
We learned in the mishna: If one unwittingly scratches letters on his flesh on Shabbat, Rabbi Eliezer deems him liable to bring a sin-offering and the Sages deem him exempt. It was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Eliezer said to the Rabbis: Didn’t the infamous ben Stada take magic spells out of Egypt in a scratch on his flesh? They said to him: He was a fool, and you cannot cite proof from a fool. That is not the way that most people write. Incidentally, the Gemara asks: Why did they call him ben Stada, when he was the son of Pandeira? Rav Ḥisda said: His mother’s husband, who acted as his father, was named Stada, but the one who had relations with his mother and fathered him was named Pandeira. The Gemara asks: Wasn’t his mother’s husband Pappos ben Yehuda? Rather, his mother was named Stada and he was named ben Stada after her. The Gemara asks: But wasn’t his mother Miriam, who braided women’s hair? The Gemara explains: That is not a contradiction. Rather, Stada was merely a nickname, as they say in Pumbedita: This one strayed [setat da] from her husband.
Pumbeditha means “having fun with the mouth”.
Babylonian Talmud, Seder Nashim, Gittin, Page 57a:3-4:
אֲזַל אַסְּקֵיהּ בִּנְגִידָא לְיֵשׁוּ הַנּוֹצְרִי, אֲמַר לֵיהּ: מַאן חֲשִׁיב בְּהָהוּא עָלְמָא? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: יִשְׂרָאֵל. מַהוּ לְאִדַּבּוֹקֵי בְּהוּ? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: טוֹבָתָם דְּרוֹשׁ, רָעָתָם לֹא תִּדְרוֹשׁ, כׇּל הַנּוֹגֵעַ בָּהֶן כְּאִילּוּ נוֹגֵעַ בְּבָבַת עֵינוֹ.
Onkelos then went and raised Jesus the Nazarene from the grave through necromancy. Onkelos said to him: Who is most important in that world where you are now? Jesus said to him: The Jewish people. Onkelos asked him: Should I then attach myself to them in this world? Jesus said to him: Their welfare you shall seek, their misfortune you shall not seek, for anyone who touches them is regarded as if he were touching the apple of his eye (see Zechariah 2:12).
אֲמַר לֵיהּ: דִּינֵיהּ דְּהָהוּא גַּבְרָא בְּמַאי? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: בְּצוֹאָה רוֹתַחַת. דְּאָמַר מָר: כׇּל הַמַּלְעִיג עַל דִּבְרֵי חֲכָמִים נִידּוֹן בְּצוֹאָה רוֹתַחַת. תָּא חֲזִי מָה בֵּין פּוֹשְׁעֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לִנְבִיאֵי אוּמּוֹת הָעוֹלָם.
Onkelos said to him: What is the punishment of that man, a euphemism for Jesus himself, in the next world? Jesus said to him: He is punished with boiling excrement. As the Master said: Anyone who mocks the words of the Sages will be sentenced to boiling excrement. And this was his sin, as he mocked the words of the Sages. The Gemara comments: Come and see the difference between the sinners of Israel and the prophets of the nations of the world. As Balaam, who was a prophet, wished Israel harm, whereas Jesus the Nazarene, who was a Jewish sinner, sought their well-being.
(6/8) A father and a son are executed for sleeping with a betrothed young woman on Yom Kippur
Babylonian Talmud, Seder Nashim, Gittin, Page 57a:17:
פְּתַח אִידַּךְ וַאֲמַר: מַעֲשֶׂה וְעָמְדוּ אַרְבָּעִים מוֹדִיּוֹת בְּדִינָר; נֶחְסַר הַשַּׁעַר מוֹדְיָא אַחַת, וּבָדְקוּ, וּמָצְאוּ אָב וּבְנוֹ שֶׁבָּאוּ עַל נַעֲרָה מְאוֹרָסָה בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים; וֶהֱבִיאוּם לְבֵית דִּין וּסְקָלוּם, וְחָזַר הַשַּׁעַר לִמְקוֹמוֹ.
Another Sage began his remarks and said: It once happened that the market price of forty se’a of grain stood at one dinar. And then the rate went down one se’a [modeya], so that only thirty-nine se’a were sold for a dinar. And they checked to see what sin had caused this, and they found a father and son who had engaged in sexual intercourse with a betrothed young woman on Yom Kippur. They brought the offenders to court and stoned them, and the rate returned to its former level.
Babylonian Talmud, Seder Nezikin, Bava Metzia, Page 83b:9-10:
שְׁלַח לֵיהּ: קוֹצִים אֲנִי מְכַלֶּה מִן הַכֶּרֶם. שְׁלַח לֵיהּ: יָבֹא בַּעַל הַכֶּרֶם וִיכַלֶּה אֶת קוֹצָיו. יוֹמָא חַד פְּגַע בֵּיהּ הָהוּא כּוֹבֵס, קַרְיֵיהּ ״חוֹמֶץ בֶּן יַיִן״. אָמַר: מִדַּחֲצִיף כּוּלֵּי הַאי – שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ רַשִּׁיעָא הוּא. אֲמַר לְהוּ: תִּפְסוּהּ. תַּפְסוּהּ.
Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, sent a message back to him: I am merely eradicating thorns from the vineyard, i.e., I am removing the wicked from the Jewish people. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa sent back to him: Let the Owner of the vineyard, i.e., God, come and eradicate His own thorns. It is not your place to do this. The Gemara relates: One day, a certain laundryman met Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, and called him vinegar, son of wine. Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, said: From the fact that this man acted so insolently by vilifying a Torah scholar, one can conclude that he is a wicked person. He told the authorities: Arrest that man. They arrested him and condemned him to death.
לְבָתַר דְּנָח דַּעְתֵּיהּ, אֲזַל בָּתְרֵיהּ לְפָרוֹקֵיהּ וְלָא מָצֵי. קָרֵי עֲלֵיהּ: ״שֹׁמֵר פִּיו וּלְשׁוֹנוֹ שֹׁמֵר מִצָּרוֹת נַפְשׁוֹ״. זַקְפוּהּ. קָם תּוּתֵי זְקִיפָא וְקָא בָכֵי. אֲמַרוּ לֵיהּ: רַבִּי, אַל יֵרַע בְּעֵינֶיךָ שֶׁהוּא וּבְנוֹ בָּעֲלוּ נַעֲרָה מְאוֹרָסָה בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים.
After his mind settled, i.e., when his anger abated, Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, regretted his hasty decision. He went after the laundryman in order to ransom him and save him from execution, but he was unable to do so. He read the verse about him: “Whoever keeps his mouth and his tongue, keeps his soul from troubles” (Proverbs 21:23), i.e., had the laundryman not issued his derogatory comment he would have been spared this fate. Ultimately, they hanged the laundryman. Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, stood beneath the gallows and wept. Those who were present said to him: Our teacher, let it not be bad in your eyes that you caused his death, as this laundryman was a wholly wicked person; you should know that he and his son both engaged in intercourse with a betrothed young woman on Yom Kippur.
(7/8) Execution of a rebellious son (Ben Sorer U’moreh)
Babylonian Talmud, Seder Nezikin, Sanhedrin, Chapter 8: Ben Sorer U’moreh, Page 71a:15:
אִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא: רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן הִיא, דְּתַנְיָא, אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן: וְכִי מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאָכַל זֶה תַּרְטֵימָר בָּשָׂר וְשָׁתָה חֲצִי לוֹג יַיִן הָאִיטַלְקִי, אָבִיו וְאִמּוֹ מוֹצִיאִין אוֹתוֹ לְסׇקְלוֹ? אֶלָּא לֹא הָיָה וְלֹא עָתִיד לִהְיוֹת, וְלָמָּה נִכְתַּב? דְּרוֹשׁ וְקַבֵּל שָׂכָר. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹנָתָן: אֲנִי רְאִיתִיו וְיָשַׁבְתִּי עַל קִבְרוֹ.
If you wish, say instead that this baraita is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon. As it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Shimon says: And is it simply due to the fact that the boy ate a tarteimar of meat and drank a half-log of Italian wine that his father and his mother shall take him out to stone him? Rather, there has never been a stubborn and rebellious son and there will never be one in the future. And why, then, was the passage relating to a stubborn and rebellious son written in the Torah? So that you may expound upon new understandings of the Torah and receive reward for your learning. Rabbi Yonatan says: This is not so, as I saw one. I was once in a place where a stubborn and rebellious son was condemned to death, and I even sat on his grave after he was executed.
(8/8) Execution of an idolatrous city
Babylonian Talmud, Seder Nezikin, Sanhedrin, Page 71a:17 (Destruction of an Idolatrous City):
מַאי טַעְמָא? אָמַר קְרָא: ״וְאֶת כׇּל שְׁלָלָהּ תִּקְבֹּץ אֶל תּוֹךְ רְחֹבָהּ וְשָׂרַפְתָּ בָאֵשׁ״. וְכֵיוָן דְּאִי אִיכָּא מְזוּזָה, לָא אֶפְשָׁר, דִּכְתִיב: ״לֹא תַעֲשׂוּן כֵּן לַה׳ אֱלֹהֵיכֶם״. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹנָתָן: אֲנִי רְאִיתִיהָ וְיָשַׁבְתִּי עַל תִּילָּהּ.
The Gemara asks: What is the reason that a city that has even one mezuza cannot become an idolatrous city? The Gemara answers: The verse states: “And you shall gather all the spoil of it into the midst of the open space of the city, and shall burn with fire both the city and the entire plunder taken in it” (Deuteronomy 13:17). And since if there is a mezuza there it is impossible to burn all the contents of the city, as it is written: “And you shall overthrow their altars, and break their pillars, and burn their asherim with fire…This you shall not do so to the Lord your God” (Deuteronomy 12:3–4). It is derived from this verse that it is prohibited to destroy a sacred item such as a mezuza. Therefore, in a city that has even one mezuza, it is impossible to fulfill the halakhot of an idolatrous city, as not all of its contents may be burned. Rabbi Yonatan says: This is not so, as I once saw an idolatrous city that was condemned to destruction, and I even sat on its ruins.