SANHEDRIN 19 (5 Teves 5785) - Dedicated in honor of the Yahrzeit of Max Turkel (Meir Menachem ben Shlomo ha'Levi), by his Eddie and Esther Turkel of Riverdale. Max was cheerful, warm and loving and is missed dearly by his family and friends.
1)SHIMON BEN SHETACH JUDGES KING YANNAI
מלך לא דן ולא דנין אותו. אמר רב יוסף: לא שנו אלא מלכי ישראל, אבל מלכי בית־דוד, דן ודנין אותן, דכתיב: (ירמיה כא) "בית דוד, כה אמר ה': דינו לבקר משפט", ואי לא דינינן להו, אינהו היכי דיני? והכתיב: (צפניה ב) "התקוששו וקשו", ואמר ריש לקיש: קשט עצמך ואחר כך קשט אחרים. אלא מלכי ישראל, מאי טעמא לא? משום מעשה שהיה, דעבדיה דינאי מלכא קטל נפשא. אמר להו שמעון בן שטח לחכמים: תנו עיניכם בו ונדוננו. שלחו ליה: עבדך קטל נפשא. שדריה להו. שלחו ליה: תא אנת נמי להכא, (שמות כא) "והועד בבעליו", אמרה תורה: יבוא בעל השור ויעמד על שורו. אתא ויתיב. אמר ליה שמעון בן שטח: ינאי המלך, עמד על רגליך ויעידו בך! ולא לפנינו אתה עומד, אלא לפני מי שאמר והיה העולם אתה עומד, שנאמר: (דברים יט) "ועמדו שני האנשים אשר להם הריב" וגו'. אמר לו: לא כשתאמר אתה, אלא כמה שיאמרו חבריך. נפנה לימינו, כבשו פניהם בקרקע, נפנה לשמאלו, כבשו פניהם בקרקע. אמר להם שמעון בן שטח: בעלי מחשבות אתם, יבוא בעל מחשבות ויפרע מכם, מיד בא גבריאל וחבטן בקרקע, ומתו. באותה שעה אמרו: מלך לא דן ולא דנין אותו, לא מעיד ולא מעידין אותו.
Translation: The Mishna teaches: A king does not judge, and is not judged. Rav Yosef says: This Halacha was taught only regarding the kings of Yisrael. However, with regard to the kings of the house of David, the king both judges and is judged, as it is written: "O house of David, so says Hash-m: Execute justice in the morning" (Yirmeyahu 21:12). If they do not judge him, how can he judge? But is it not written (Tzefanyah 2:1), "Hiskosheshu Vekashu"? Reish Lakish says: (This teaches) "Adorn yourself first, and then adorn others"-that is, one who is not subject to judgment may not judge others. The Gemara asks: What is the reason that others do not judge the kings of Israel? It is due to an incident that occurred. The slave of King Yannai killed a person. Shimon ben Shetach said to the Chachamim: "Look at him, and let us judge him." They sent a message to Yannai: "Your slave killed a person." Yannai sent the slave to them, and they sent a message to Yannai: "You too come here," as the Pasuk says: "He should be testified against with his owner" (Shemot 21:29). The Torah teaches that the owner of the ox must come and stand alongside it. The Gemara continues: Yannai came and sat down. Shimon ben Shetach said to him: "Yannai the king, stand on your feet, and witnesses will testify against you. You are standing not before us to give us honor, but before the One who spoke and the world came into being, as it is written: 'Then both the people, between whom the controversy is, shall stand before Hash-m, before the priests and the judges that shall be in those days' (Devarim 19:17)." Yannai the king said to him: "I will not stand when you alone say this to me, but according to what your colleagues say. If the entire court tells me to stand, I will stand." Shimon ben Shetach turned to his right. The judges lowered their faces out of fear and did not speak. He turned to his left, and the judges again lowered their faces and did not speak. Shimon ben Shetach said to them: "You are masters of thoughts, (preoccupied with your private thoughts and not speaking). May the Master of thoughts, come and punish you." Immediately, the angel Gavriel came and struck the judges to the ground, and they died. At that moment, they said: "A king does not judge others, nor is he judged, and he does not testify, and others do not testify concerning him, due to the danger of the matter."
(a)How could Shimon ben Shetach judge King Yannai if Shimon's sister was Yannai's wife (as stated in Berachos 48a)? One may not judge his relative (as the Mishnah teaches later on 27b)?
1.Aruch LaNer #1: Shimon ben Shetach was the head of the Beis Din but it was the 23 judges under him that actually judged.
2.Iyun Yaakov, Aruch LaNer #2: This story took place before King Yannai married his sister.
(b)Why did he refer to the judges as masters of thoughts?
1.Maharsha: It is the way of people who are thinking to lower their faces. But these judges were not doing this to think, but rather out of fear.
(c)Who is the 'master of thoughts' who punished them?
1.Rashi - Hash-m Himself.
2.Iyun Yaakov: The angel Gavriel. Tosfos (Shabbos 12) tell us that the only angel that knows Aramaic is Gavriel. Similarly, the only angel that knows people's thoughts is Gavriel.
(d)Why were the judges punished by being 'struck to the ground'?
1.Iyun Yaakov: The Pasuk states (Mishlei 29:4), "A king establishes the land (ground) with justice". These judges did not uphold justice, so they were struck to the ground.
19b----------------------------------------19b
2)HOW DID KING DAVID MARRY TWO SISTERS?
תניא אמרו לו לר' יהודה נשים הראויות לו מבית המלך ומאי נינהו מירב ומיכל שאלו תלמידיו את ר' יוסי היאך נשא דוד שתי אחיות בחייהן אמר להן מיכל אחר מיתת מירב נשאה ר' יהושע בן קרחה אומר קידושי טעות היו לו במירב שנאמר תנה את אשתי את מיכל אשר ארסתי לי במאה ערלות פלשתים מאי תלמודא אמר רב פפא מיכל אשתי ולא מירב אשתי מאי קידושי טעות דכתיב והיה האיש אשר יכנו יעשרנו המלך עושר גדול וגו' אזל קטליה אמר לו מלוה אית לך גבאי והמקדש במלוה אינה מקודשת אזל יהבה לעדריאל דכתיב ויהי בעת תת את מירב בת שאול לדוד וגו' א"ל אי בעית דאתן לך מיכל זיל אייתי לי מאה ערלות פלשתים אזל אייתי ליה א"ל מלוה ופרוטה אית לך גבאי שאול סבר מלוה ופרוטה דעתיה אמלוה ודוד סבר מלוה ופרוטה דעתיה אפרוטה ואיבעית אימא דכולי עלמא מלוה ופרוטה דעתיה אפרוטה שאול סבר לא חזו ולא מידי ודוד סבר חזו לכלבי ושונרי ור' יוסי האי תנה את אשתי את מיכל מאי דריש ביה ר' יוסי לטעמיה דתניא רבי יוסי היה דורש מקראות מעורבין כתיב ויקח המלך את שני בני רצפה בת איה אשר ילדה לשאול את אדמוני ואת מפיבושת ואת חמשת בני מיכל אשר ילדה לעדריאל המחולתי וגו' וכי לעדריאל נתנה והלא לפלטי בן ליש נתנה דכתיב ושאול נתן את מיכל בתו אשת דוד לפלטי בן ליש וגו' אלא מקיש קידושי מירב לעדריאל לקידושי מיכל לפלטי מה קידושי מיכל לפלטי בעבירה אף קידושי מירב לעדריאל בעבירה ור' יהושע בן קרחה נמי הכתיב את חמשת בני מיכל בת שאול אמר לך רבי יהושע וכי מיכל ילדה והלא מירב ילדה מירב ילדה ומיכל גידלה לפיכך נקראו על שמה ללמדך שכל המגדל יתום בתוך ביתו מעלה עליו הכתוב כאילו ילדו:
Translation: A Baraisa taught: The Chachamim said to R. Yehuda: "The Pasuk does not mean that David married the widows of Shaul, but rather that he married women suitable for him from Shaul's house. Who were they? Merav and Michal, the daughters of Shaul." R. Yosi's students asked: "How could David marry two sisters while they were both still alive, as the Pasuk (in Vayikra 18:18) prohibits it?" R. Yosi answered: "David married Michal only after Merav died." R. Yehoshua ben Korcḥa said: "David's betrothal to Merav was invalid from the start, and therefore Michal was permitted to him." The Gemara asks: "How is this derived? How does R. Yehoshua ben Korcḥa understand that David's betrothal to Merav was invalid from the beginning?" Rav Papa said: "It is based on the Pasuk from Shmuel II 3:14, where David says, 'Deliver to me my wife Michal'-this shows that Michal was his wife, but Merav was not." The Gemara asks: "What caused David's betrothal to Merav to be invalid?" The answer is given: As the Pasuk says (Shmuel I 17:25), "And it will be, that the man who kills him, the king will enrich him with great riches, and give him his daughter, and make his father's house free in Yisrael." (This refers to the promise Shaul made to the person who would kill Golias.) David killed Golias, and Shaul owed him the great riches he had promised. However, Shaul's promise was tied to a debt, not a proper betrothal, making the marriage arrangement with Merav problematic. Although David killed Golias, the betrothal did not take effect as a true marriage. The Gemara continues: "Even though David did not actually lend Shaul any money, the Halakhah (Jewish law) states that a betrothal based on a forgiven loan does not take effect. Therefore, David's betrothal to Merav was not valid." Shaul then gave Merav to Adriel, as the Pasuk says in Shmuel I 18:19: "And it came to pass that when Merav, Shaul's daughter, should have been given to David, she was given to Adriel the Mecholite as a wife." Then, Shaul offered another daughter, Michal, to David as a wife, if David would bring him 100 foreskins of the Philistines. David went and brought 200. Shaul said to him: "I have loaned you money and a Prutah's worth in your hand." (Shaul's reasoning here is that the betrothal is invalid because, in such a case, the person intends that the loan should be for the betrothal, not the Prutah, which is the minimal form of currency used in a betrothal.) Shaul reasoned that the betrothal was invalid because the intention was to focus on the loan rather than the Prutah. David reasoned that it was valid because the Prutah itself, here represented by the foreskins, should be the focus of the betrothal. Alternatively, we can answer that both agree that the Prutah is intended for the betrothal. The dispute was whether the foreskins had any value. Shaul reasoned that they have no value. David reasoned that they are worth something, even if minimal-suitable for dogs and cats. The Gemara asks: "What does R. Yosi derive from the Pasuk 'Deliver to me my wife Michal' (Shmuel II 3:14)?" R. Yosi understands this in his usual way of interpreting Pesukim that seem mixed up. The Tosefta continues: It is written in Shmuel II 21:8: "And the king took the two sons of Ritzpah, the daughter of Ayah, whom she bore to Shaul, Armoni and Mepiboshes, and the five sons of Michal, daughter of Shaul, whom she bore to Adriel the Mecholite." Did Shaul give Michal to Adriel? Did he not give her to Palti, the son of Layish, as the Pasuk says in Shmuel I 25:44: "And Shaul gave his daughter Michal, the wife of David, to Palti, son of Layish"? The Tosefta resolves this: It is not that Shaul gave Michal to Adriel. Rather, the Pasuk compares the betrothal of Merav to Adriel to the betrothal of Michal to Palti. Just as the betrothal of Michal to Palti was in error (i.e., invalid), so too the betrothal of Merav to Adriel was in error. R. Yehoshua ben Korcḥa also interprets it this way: "And the five sons of Michal, daughter of Shaul?" R. Yehoshua ben Korcḥa would say to you: "Did Michal bear them? Merav bore them, but Michal raised them. Therefore, they are called her children, as whoever raises an orphan in his home is considered to have given birth to him."
(a)If forgiving a loan is an invalid betrothal, why did David think that he was married to Meirav?
1.Maharsha: Although forgiving a loan is an invalid betrothal, but betrothal by allowing the delay of payment of a loan or betrothing with the benefit of forgiving a loan are valid betrothals.
(b)Why did Shaul ask for one hundred foreskins and why did David bring him two hundred?
1.Ben Yehoyada: Shaul asked for 100 to betroth Michal, as it is the Gematria of her name מ-י-כ-ל. But David said that since Michal was righteous, and 'every righteous person's name is doubled, one below and one above at its root', he instead brought 200.
(c)What was Shaul's logic in making what seems to be an unusual request?
1.Shmuel I 18 25: Shaul said that he wanted to take revenge against the Philistines and disgrace them through this, but he actually expected David to be killed by them. (Meam Loez explains that Shaul reasoned that David would fail since he would be acting for himself, to marry Michal, rather than for the sake of Heaven.)
(d)Why did Shaul say that the foreskins of the Philistines had no value. Surely they could be used to feed cats and dogs, as David said?
1.Ben Yehoyada: They had no value to Shaul, as he did not own cats and dogs. He also would not have sold the foreskins to others, since it is not the way of a king to sell items of such low value.
2.Yashresh Yaakov, Einayim L'Mishpat: There is a disagreement among the Rishonim as to whether there is a prohibition to gain benefit from the body of a gentile. This was the point over which Shaul and David disagreed.
(e)If David killed the Philistines and then brought their foreskins to Shaul as Kidushin for Michal, was he not benefitting from dead bodies, which is prohibited?
1.Tosfos Zevachim 71b: The prohibition only applies to Jewish bodies.
2.Mishneh leMelech Avel 14-21: He betrothed with the benefit Shaul received that David followed his command, not with the actual foreskins.
3.Mishneh leMelech: David removed their foreskins before he killed them.
4.Shvus Yaakov 1-89: David had acquired them as Canaanite slaves and there is no prohibition to benefit from the body of one's dead slave.
5.Sheilas Yaavetz (1-41): Since an Orlah (foreskin) is just skin, it is not included in the prohibition.
3)IF ONE TEACHES SOMEONE'S CHILD IT IS AS IF HE FATHERED HIM
(חנינא קרא יוחנן ואשתו אלעזר וגאולה ושמואל בלימודי סימן): רבי חנינא אומר מהכא ותקראנה לו השכנות שם לאמר יולד בן לנעמי וכי נעמי ילדה והלא רות ילדה אלא רות ילדה ונעמי גידלה לפיכך נקרא על שמה רבי יוחנן אמר מהכא ואשתו היהודית ילדה את ירד אביגדור וגו' אלה בני בתיה בת פרעה אשר לקח (לו) מרד מרד זה כלב ולמה נקרא שמו מרד שמרד בעצת מרגלים וכי בתיה ילדה והלא יוכבד ילדה אלא יוכבד ילדה ובתיה גידלה לפיכך נקרא על שמה רבי אלעזר אמר מהכא גאלת בזרוע עמך בני יעקב ויוסף סלה וכי יוסף ילד והלא יעקב ילד אלא יעקב ילד ויוסף כילכל לפיכך נקראו על שמו אמר רבי שמואל בר נחמני א"ר יונתן כל המלמד בן חבירו תורה מעלה עליו הכתוב כאילו ילדו שנאמר ואלה תולדות אהרן ומשה וכתיב ואלה שמות בני אהרן לומר לך אהרן ילד ומשה לימד לפיכך נקראו על שמו לכן כה אמר ה' אל בית יעקב אשר פדה את אברהם וכי היכן מצינו ביעקב שפדאו לאברהם אמר רב יהודה שפדאו מצער גידול בנים והיינו דכתיב לא עתה יבוש יעקב וגו' לא עתה יבוש יעקב מאביו ולא עתה פניו יחוורו מאבי אביו
Translation: (The Gemara presents a mnemonic for the following discussion: Ḥanina called; Yoḥanan and his wife; Elazar and redemption; and Shmuel in my studies.) R. Chanina says: The proof for the earlier statement is from "And the neighbors gave him a name, saying: There is a son born to Naomi" (Rus 4:17). Did Naomi give birth to the son? Did Rus not give birth? Rather, Rus gave birth, but Naomi raised him, so he was called by her name. R. Yocḥanan says: Proof for the earlier statement comes from "And his wife haYehudis gave birth to Yered the father of Gedor, Heber the father of Soco, and Yekusiel the father of Zanoach" (Divrei haYamim I 4:18). Mered is Calev, and why was he named Mered (rebellion)? Because he rebelled against the spies' advice. (According to this Midrash, these 'sons' refer to Moshe himself.) Did Bityah give birth to Moshe? Did Yocheved not give birth to him? Rather, Yocheved gave birth, but Bityah raised him, so Moshe was called by her name. R. Elazar says: Proof for the earlier statement comes from "You have with Your arm redeemed Your people, the children of Yaakov and Yosef, Selah" (Tehillim 77:16). Did Yosef father (all of Yaakov's children)? Did Yaakov not (father them)? Rather, Yaakov fathered them, but Yosef sustained them financially, so they were called by his name. R. Shmuel bar Nacḥmani says that R. Yonasan says: Anyone who teaches another person's child Torah is credited as if he fathered him, as it is written: "These are the generations of Aharon and Moshe" (Bamidbar 3:1), and then immediately after, "And these are the names of the sons of Aharon" (Bamidbar 3:2), but Moshe's children are not mentioned. This teaches that although Aharon fathered his children, Moshe taught them Torah, so they are named after him. The Gemara brings another derivation regarding child-rearing: "So says Hash-m to the house of Yaakov, who redeemed Avraham; Yaakov shall not now be ashamed" (Yeshayahu 29:22). But where does it say Yaakov redeemed Avraham? Rav Yehuda says it means Yaakov redeemed Avraham from the suffering of raising children. And this is as it is written: "Yaakov shall not now be ashamed, (nor shall his face now turn pale)" meaning: "Yaakov shall not now be ashamed" before his father, and "neither shall his face now turn pale" before his father's father (since he took upon himself the role of raising the tribes).
(a)What is the meaning of Yaakov redeeming Avraham from the suffering of raising children?
1.Rashi: It refers to the difficulty of raising all of the tribes, which was really supposed to be Avraham's responsibility.
2.Tosfos: Having children is a blessing and a joy. Rather it refers to the difficulty of the conflict between Yosef and his brothers resulting in the descent of Bnei Yisrael to Egypt.
4)MICHAL'S HUSBAND PALTI BEN LAYISH
כתיב פלטי וכתיב פלטיאל אמר ר' יוחנן פלטי שמו ולמה נקרא שמו פלטיאל שפלטו אל מן העבירה מה עשה נעץ חרב בינו לבינה אמר כל העוסק בדבר זה ידקר בחרב זה והכתיב וילך אתה אישה שנעשה לה כאישה והכתיב הלך ובכה על המצוה דאזיל מיניה עד בחורים שנעשו שניהם כבחורים שלא טעמו טעם ביאה אמר רבי יוחנן תוקפו של יוסף ענוותנותו של בועז תוקפו של בועז ענוותנותו של פלטי בן ליש תוקפו של יוסף ענוותנותו של בועז דכתיב ויהי בחצי הלילה ויחרד האיש וילפת מאי וילפת אמר רב שנעשה בשרו כראשי לפתות תוקפו של בועז ענוותנותו של פלטי בן ליש כדאמרן
Translation: The Gemara discusses Palti, son of Layish: It is written as "Palti" (Shmuel I 25:44) in one place, and "Paltiel" (Shmuel II 3:15) in another. R. Yocḥanan says: Palti was his real name, but he was called Paltiel as Hash-m saved him from sin (by helping him to refrain from relations with Michal, understanding she was actually David's wife). He thrust a sword between them and said, "Whoever engages in this matter will be stabbed with this", to ensure no sin would occur. The Gemara asks: But is it not written, "And her husband went with her, weeping" (Shmuel II 3:16) (referring to Palti as Michal's husband)? The Gemara responds: This means Palti became like a husband to her through his affection. The Gemara asks: But if he knew she was David's wife, why was he weeping? The Gemara answers: He wept because he had lost the Mitzvah (he would no longer receive the reward for restraining himself). The Pasuk says they went "to Bachurim," meaning they became like young men who had never been involved in relations at all. R. Yocḥanan says: Yosef's strength is similar to Boaz's humility, as Yosef's restraint is praised more than Boaz's, (who resisted Rus at the threshing floor in Rus 3:8. Boaz's restraint is shown when, despite the situation being potentially compromising, he did not engage with Rus, as she asked him to redeem her as a kinsman. Yosef, however, had to exert even more effort, as Potifar's wife was married.) Likewise, Boaz's strength is the humility of Palti, son of Layish, (as Palti's restraint was greater still). Yosef's power is the humility of Boaz, as it is written (about Boaz): "And it came to pass at midnight that the man was startled and Vayelafes (and behold, a woman lay at his feet.)" (Rus 3:8). What is the meaning of "Vayelafes"? Rav says: The meaning is that his flesh became like the heads of turnips (Lefasos) i.e. was aroused, (but even though Rus was not married he refrained from relations with her; while Yosef had to exert more effort.) Boaz's strength is the humility of Palti, son of Layish, as it was said.
(a)In what way was Paltiel's restraint greater than that of Boaz?
1.Rashi: Boaz's test was for only one night, whereas Paltiel's test was for many years.
2.Tzidkas haTzadik (51): He even relished the opportunity to resist his desire. (The Gemara explained that this is why he cried.)
(b)Why did Paltiel insert a sword and say that whoever engages in adultery would be punished with the sword? The punishment for adultery is Chenek - death by strangulation, not by the sword?
1.Ein Eliyahu: Paltiel viewed David as king and one who rebels against a king incurs death by the sword.
(c)How would a sword help to prevent him from sinning if he had inserted it there himself?
1.Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz: At the beginning, he had a clear and strong recognition of the terrible crime of adultery. He wanted to make some kind of physical way to remember this feeling and his decision to resist, so that it would help him to avoid sin when challenged.
