Commentaire sur Sanhédrin 7:12

ארבע מיתות. סקילה שריפה הרג וחנק – stoning is more severe than burning and both of them [are more severe] than decapitation and the three of them [are more severe] than execution by strangulation. And we derive from it that he who is liable for two death [penalties], we establish that he is judged by the more severe [of the two].

Four deaths have been entrusted to the court: stoning, burning, slaying [by the sword] and strangulation.
R. Simeon says: “burning, stoning, strangulation and slaying.”
That (the previous is the manner of stoning.
The first mishnah of chapter seven lists the four types of execution that Jewish law prescribed.
There are four types of death carried out (at least theoretically) according to Jewish law. Our mishnah contains a dispute with regards to which type of execution is harsher than the others. The Sages claim that stoning is the harshest, followed by burning, slaying and strangulation. Rabbi Shimon disagrees. He holds that burning is the harshest, and slaying the least harsh.
The mishnah notes that the previous chapter described how stoning was to be carried out. The following two mishnayoth will describe burning, slaying and strangulation.

רבי שמעון אומר וכו' – but Halakah is not according to Rabbi Shimon.

זו מצות הנסקלין – this is explained in the above chapter (i.e., Chapter six, Mishnah four).

משקעין אותו – that he won’t turn himself around this way and that way, and the string will not all on to his skin.

The manner in which burning is executed is as follows: They would lower him into dung up to his armpits, then a hard cloth was placed within a soft one, wound round his neck, and the two loose ends pulled in opposite directions, forcing him to open his mouth. A wick was then lit, and thrown into his mouth, so that it descended into his body and burned his bowels.
R. Judah says: “Should he have died at their hands [being strangled by the bandage before the wick was thrown into his mouth], they would not have fulfilled the requirements of execution by fire. Rather his mouth was forced open with pincers against his wish, the wick lit and thrown into his mouth, so that it descended into his body and burned his bowels.
Rabbi Eleazar ben Zadok said: “It once happened that a priest's daughter committed adultery, whereupon bundles of sticks were placed around her and she was burnt. The Sages said to him: “That was because the court at that time was not well learned in law.
Our mishnah describes how execution by burning was to be carried out. It might be helpful to begin with Rabbi Eleazar ben Zadok (section three), who testifies to having seen a priest’s daughter executed by being totally burnt (evidently alive). This follows the seemingly simple requirement mentioned in Lev. 21:9, that a priest’s daughter who committed adultery should be burned. However, the Sages who disagree with him, and those who state their opinion in section one, believed that execution by burning was to be done by burning up the insides of the person. They would open up his mouth and throw burning material inside and it would descend and burn him from the inside. Rabbi Judah’s dispute with the Sages is with regards to the manner in which they would force open his mouth; he does not disagree with the Sages general understanding of how execution by burning was carried out. Rabbi Judah is concerned lest in the process of opening his mouth they strangle him which is a different form of execution.
It is worth discussing briefly the nature of the two different understandings of death by burning. The Rabbis prescribe a form of burning that doesn’t seem to be the simple understanding of the Torah. When the Torah states that someone is to be burned, it probably means an execution similar to that referred to by Rabbi Eleazar ben Zadok in section three. Therefore the question needs to be asked: why did the Rabbis insist that burning would take place by burning the inside and not the outside? The answer is probably not that one form of death was more or less painful than the other. They both sound quite painful. The best answer that is borne out by many other sources, is that the Rabbis did not want to sanction an execution in which the outer body was disfigured. While they believed in the death penalty (again, at least theoretically) they wanted to execute the criminal while doing as little physical, external damage to the body as possible. The body, after all, is a gift from God, and while the person may deserve death according to the law, damaging the body serves no purpose. This is to be contrasted to other cultures that have existed until this very day, who considered the public disfiguring of the body of the criminal to be desirable, either as an example to the rest of society, or as a means to take vengeance even on the corpse. The Rabbis took a strong stand against such practices, one that we will see in several places. Indeed we have already seen this attitude in the previous chapter, when it stated that the hanged body was to be taken down immediately. Although the criminal deserved to die, mutilating his body was indeed, according to Jewish law, an affront to God.

קשה לתוך הרכה – wrap a hard scarf inside the soft one; the hard one from the inside to choke and the soft one from the outside to balance

את הפתילה – he kindles the string of the limb and squeeze it into his mouth.

וחומרת – shrinks/curls – the language of (Lamentations 2:11): “My heart is in tumult”; and we derive it from the sons of Aaron as it says concerning them (Leviticus 10:6): “all the house of Israel shall bewail the burning [that the LORD has wrought],” but their bodies were not burned, for it is written (Leviticus 10:5): “They came forward and carried the out of the camp by their tunics…” Here too the command if burning is fulfilled even though only their bowels were burned alone, and this is more preferable as is it written (Leviticus 19:18): “Love your fellow as yourself…,,” it is clear to him a nice death.

אף הוא אם מת בידם – that is to say, if he dies at their hands by their choking before throwing in the string.

לא היו מקיימים מצות שריפה – therefore, they do not choke him.

אלא פותחים את פיו בצבת – Tanalovia – in the foreign language; and the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehudah.

שלא היה ב"ד של אותה שעה בקי – they were Sadducees, for they lack the analogy but [only] the Bible [as understood] literally.

רבי יהודה אומר ניוול הוא זה – that he kills him while standing and he falls.

Introduction Mishnah three describes the final two forms of execution: slaying by the sword and strangulation.

סדן – a thick piece of wood inserted into the ground like that of smiths, and they explained it like the Baraitha (Talmud Sanhedrin 52b), that the reason that Rabbi Yehuda disputes the Sages, since the Torah states (Leviticus 18:3): “…nor shall you follow their laws,” to which the Rabbis responded to him since it is written with a sword in the Torah and the Biblical verse stated (Exodus 21:20): “[When a man strikes his slave, male or female, with a rod, and he dies there an then], he must be avenged,” so we don’t derive it from them, and the Halakha is according to the Sages.

Slaying by the sword was performed thus: they would cut off his head by the sword, as is done by the civil authorities. R. Judah says: “This is a disgrace! Rather his head was laid on a block and severed with an axe. They said to him: “No death is more disgraceful than this.” According to the Sages execution by sword was done by decapitating the condemned, as is the practice amongst the non-Jewish authorities. Rabbi Judah says that this is a disgrace. Rather they should lay his head on a block of wood and chop it off with an axe. The Sages reply to Rabbi Judah that this is even more disgraceful. Although it is hard for us to understand why one form of decapitation is more disgraceful than the others, the important issue in this mishnah is that both sides want to prevent a disgraceful execution. As we have already stated, in the ancient world it was common to search for the most disgraceful execution possible. The Rabbis took a totally opposite approach. Even while executing the man the court must look for the least disgraceful way of ending his life.

Strangulation was performed thus: the condemned man was lowered into dung up to his armpits, then a hard cloth was placed within a soft one, wound round his neck, and the two ends pulled in opposite directions until he was dead. Strangulation was done by tying a rope around the condemned man’s neck and pulling it from both sides until he dies. Again, we see in this mishnah that the Sages tried as much as possible to prevent disfiguration to the body. This is accomplished in our mishnah by putting the rough rope inside a soft rope. Although in either way the condemned will die, the soft rope will leave less damage on the body. It is also important to note that while all of the other forms of execution are mentioned specifically in the Torah, strangulation is not. It is probably a new form of execution, created by the Rabbis, specifically with the intent of causing as little physical damage to the body as possible.

Questions for Further Thought:
• What is the basis for the dispute between Rabbi Judah and the Sages?

אלו הן הנסקלין – there are from among them, that it is written concerning them explicitly “stoning,” and those that are not written on them “stoning,” are written concerning them, “his blood be upon him,” or “their blood will be upon them,” for every place where it says, “is blood be upon him,” or “their blood will be upon them” – is none other than stoning, as we derive from the cited ghost and soothsayer, as it is written (Leviticus 20:27): “…they shall be pelted with stones – their bloodguilt shall be upon them.”

Introduction Mishnah four lists those crimes for which one is stoned and begins to explain them.

והנותן מזרעו למולך – For this Tanna holds that Molekh (the fire-god of the Canaanites) is not idolatry, but is a statute of the nations in general, since he teaches in the Mishnah “idolatry”, and also teaches in the Mishnah “Molekh.”

This mishnah lists all of those who are executed by stoning and then begins to explain some of the details. Most of these crimes are specifically listed in the Torah as being punishable by stoning. Some are learned through an analogy with other crimes. We will mention the verses for each crime.(1) one who has sexual relations with his mother: Leviticus 18:7, 20:11. (2) with his father's wife: Leviticus 18:8, 20:11. (3) with his daughter -in-law: Leviticus 20:12. (4) with a male: Leviticus 20:13. (5) with a beast: Leviticus 20:15. (6) a woman who commits bestiality with a beast: Leviticus 20:16. (7) a blasphemer: Leviticus 24:15-16. (8) an idolater: Deuteronomy 17:2-5. (9) one who gives of his seed to molech: Leviticus 20:2. (10) a necromancer or a wizard: Leviticus 20:27. (11) one who desecrates the Sabbath: Number 15:35. (12) he who curses his father or mother: Exodus 21:17, Leviticus 20:9. (13) he who commits adultery with a betrothed woman: Deuteronomy 22:23-24. (14) one who incites [individuals to idolatry: Deuteronomy 13:7-11. (15) one who seduces [a whole town to idolatry]: Deuteronomy 13:7-11. (16) a sorcerer: Exodus 22:17, Deuteronomy 18:10. (17) a wayward and rebellious son: Deuteronomy 21:18-21. The rest of chapter seven will deal with the first 16 of these issues.

והמקלל אביו ואמו – which is worse than striking [his father and/or his mother]. For there are two [forms of] degradation of his father and mother – as well as taking the Name of Heaven in vain, and it is taught in the Mishnah that he is not liable until he curses them by name.

He who has sexual relations with his mother incurs a penalty in respect of her both as his mother and as his father's wife. R. Judah says: “He is liable in respect of her as his mother only.” One who has relations with his mother incurs two crimes, one for having relations with his mother and a separate crime for having relations with his father’s wife. Of course there is no practical difference with regards to how many crimes he has committed if he is to incur the death penalty, since you can only kill a man once. There is a difference though if the relations were accidental (such as he didn’t know that she was his mother). In such a case he must bring a sacrifice to make atonement. Our mishnah teaches that he will have to bring two sacrifices. Rabbi Judah holds that he is obligated for only one sacrifice.

והמסית – individuals.

He who has sexual relations with his father's wife incurs a penalty in respect of her both as his father's wife, and as a married woman, both during his father's lifetime and after his death, whether she was widowed from betrothal or from marriage. One who has relations with his father’s wife (not his mother) is obligated for having relations with a married woman and with his father’s wife. He is obligated no matter if his father is alive or has already died and she is now his widow. Similarly, he is obligated even if she was only betrothed to his father, but not fully married.

והמדיח – The apostate city.

He who has sexual relations with his daughter-in-law incurs a penalty in respect of her both as his daughter-in-law and as a married woman, both during his son's lifetime and after his death, whether she was widowed from betrothal or from marriage. All of the same laws with regards to the prohibition of having relations with one’s father’s wife are true with regards to one’s son’s wife.

מכשף – as it is written (Exodus 22:17): “You shall not tolerate a sorceress,” and near it (next verse, 18): “Whoever lies with a beast shall be put to death.” Just as the one who lies with a beast [shall be put to death] by stoning, so too, the sorceress, [shall be put to death] by stoning.

He who has sexual relations with a male or a beast, and a woman that commits bestiality: if the man has sinned, how has the animal sinned? But because the human was enticed to sin by the animal, therefore scripture ordered that it should be stoned. Another reason is that the animal should not pass through the market, and people say, this is the animal on account of which so and so was stoned. This section deals with bestiality. According to Leviticus 20:15-16, an animal who has had sexual relations with a man or woman is to be killed. Our mishnah asks why should the animal be killed. After all it certainly had no control over its actions. The mishnah supplies two answers: 1) since it caused a man or woman to sin. Perhaps we are concerned that another person might also sin with this animal. 2) So people will not be reminded of the crime every time they see the animal.

הבא על האם חייב עליה – two sins, and with all of them [which deal with] incest [it is written concerning them "כרת" / extirpation and it is written concerning them] a separation of sins, and even with one body, and such is the Halakha.

בין מן האירוסין – for since he betrothed her, she is his wife, as it is written (Leviticus 20:14): “If a man marries a woman….” From the time of his taking, she is called “his wife.” And this “taking” is Kiddushin/Sanctification, as we derive "קיחה"\קיחה" – from the field of Ephron (via an analogy – Leviticus 20:14 and Genesis 23:13 – “accept it from me, that I may bury my dead there”).

עד שיפרש את השם – and he will blaspheme the name of God by name, as it states (Leviticus 24:16): “If he also pronounces the name LORD, [he shall be put to death. The whole community shall stone him;] if he has thus pronounced the Name [he shall be put to death],” that he pronounces God’s name, by Name.

The blasphemer is punished only if he utters [the divine] name.
Rabbi Joshua b. Korcha said: “The whole day [of the trial] the witnesses are examined by means of a substitute for the divine name:, ‘may Yose smite Yose.”
When the trial was finished, the accused was not executed on this evidence, but all persons were removed [from court], and the chief witness was told, ‘State literally what you heard.’
Thereupon he did so, [using the divine name].
The judges then arose and tore their garments, which were not to be resewn.
The second witness stated: “I too have heard thus” [but not uttering the divine name], and the third says: “I too heard thus.”
Mishnah five deals with the blasphemer and the special circumstances of his trial.
With regards to the blasphemer the Torah states (Lev. 24:15): “Anyone who blasphemes his God shall bear his guilt. If he also pronounces the name of the Lord, he shall be put to death.” From these verses the Rabbis learned that the blasphemer was obligated for the death penalty only if he used God’s four letter name.
The problem with putting the blasphemer on trial is that when the witnesses testify and repeat what they heard, they too will be blaspheming God’s name. Although they certainly would not receive the death penalty for doing so, it was nevertheless seen to be unacceptable for even a witness to repeat what he heard, especially in a public trial. Therefore, during the court’s deliberation they used a code word, “may Yose smite Yose”. However, in order to complete the trial the witnesses needed to state what they heard explicitly at least one time. Therefore, at the end of the trial they would remove everyone from the court and only the witnesses and the judges would remain. They would then ask the eldest witness to say explicitly what he heard. So painful was it for the judges to hear God’s name being blasphemed that they would tear their clothes and not repair them. This was a typical sign of mourning. The remaining witnesses would not need to say exactly what they heard, thereby repeating the blasphemy. Rather they would merely say that they heard what the first person heard.

בכל יום – all the time that there is give-and-take in the examination of the witnesses.

היו דנין אותן בכינוי – any person who perverts matters and speaks like he is cursing and attaches to another is called a substitute in the language of the Sages, and in the language of the Bible (Job 32:22): “For I do not know how to temper my speech – [My Maker would soon carry me off!].”

יכה יוסי את יוסי – AI heard because it is four letters [in length], and in Gematria, equals “Elo’him”/”God” (i.e., 86), therefore we use as a nickname, the name of four letters for “Yosi.”

נגמר הדין – and the Jewish court comes to state that he is guilty, they are not able to kill him based upon this testimony that they heard, for they did not hear from their lips other than the curse by nickname.

אלא מוציאים את כל האדם לחוץ – for it is a disgrace/obscenity to announce blasphemy in public.

וקורעין ולא מאיחין – forever, [and specifically] and Alexandrian seam where the tear is not recognized, but other forms of sewing are permitted.

אף אני לא שמעתי כמוהו – and he does not have to mention the blaspheming by Name.

והשלישי אומר – and he brings it like one who says: just as two are one testimony, also three are one testimony.

אחד העובד – idolatry in the way that it is the manner to do so.

He who engages in idol-worship [is executed]. This includes the one whoserves it, sacrifices, offers incense, makes libations, bows to it, accepts it as a god, or says to it, “You are my god.”
But he who embraces, kisses it, sweeps or sprinkles the ground before it, washes it, anoints it, clothes it, or puts shoes on it, he transgresses a negative commandment [but is not executed].
He who vows or swears by its name, violates a negative commandment.
He who uncovers himself before Baal-Peor [is guilty and is to be stoned for] this is how it is worshipped.
He who casts a stone on Merculis [is guilty and is to be stoned for] this is how it is worshipped.
Mishnah six deals with which forms of idol worship will cause a Jew to incur the death penalty.
Our mishnah describes what types of idolatrous activities are punished by death and what types are forbidden but not punishable by death. Basically we can summarize that activities that are performed solely in worship of the idol, such as bowing to it, sacrificing to it, or specifically stating that the idol is a god, are punished by death. However, ancillary actions that are not done with the purpose of worship are forbidden but not punishable by death.
The final two clauses of our mishnah mention two idols who were worshipped by strange types of actions. Baal-Peor is worshipped by the idolater’s exposing himself. Merculis (Mercury) is worshipped by throwing stones at it. Since these are considered to be worship, the one who performs them is obligated for the death penalty.

אחד הזובח – and even though it is not the manner of its worship like one of these four kinds of worship, he liable and all of the other forms of worship outside of these, one is not liable until one worships in the manner of these kinds of worship.

והמקבלו עליו לאלוה – even by merely saying it. And there is an analogy by close textual association to sacrificing, as it is written (Exodus 32:8): “…and sacrificed to it, saying, ‘This is your god….”

והאומר לו אלי אתה – in its presence, and the end section [of the Mishnah] comes to reveal the beginning [part of the Mishnah], for if the Mishnah had only taught the first section, I would think that these words [only] were in its presence, but not in its presence, I would not, therefore, the Mishnah teaches at the end, “in its presence,” so that it follows that at the beginning is “not in its presence” – and even so, he is liable.

המגדף – embrace

עובר בלא תעשה – an extra “you shall not serve them” is written (Exodus 20:5 and Deuteronomy 5:8).

הנודר בשמו – a vow of abstinence (i.e., in place of a sacrifice and for consecration of an object – see Mishnah Nedarim, Chapter 1, Mishnah 2) from all the fruits of the world in the name of the such-and-such idol worship.

המקיים – swears

עובר בלא תעשה – (Exodus 23:13): “Make no mention of the names of other gods: [they shall not be heard on your lips].”

הפוער עצמו – to splash excrement before it.

וזו היא עבודתו – and even if he intended to despise it, for since this is its worship, he is liable for a sin-offering.

והזורק אבל למרקוליס – that we worship him with the throwing of stones, and the removing a stone from before him is also liable, for we also worship him by the removal of stones.

מרקוליס – the reverse of praise; “bitter” is the language of reversal, such as: Master of the charm formula, or instead of the ritually slaughtered hen, praise/decry, praise/disgrace.

זו היא עבודתו – and even if he intended to stone him, he is liable for a sin-offering.

שימסור למולך – transmit it in the hands of the [idolatrous] priests.

Introduction The first half of mishnah seven deals with one who gives of his seed to Molech. The second half of mishnah seven deals with the “Ba’al Ob” and the “Yidde’oni”. We will explain all of these terms below.

ויעביר באש – pass him from one side to the other.

He who gives of his seed to Molech is not liable unless he delivers it to Molech and causes it to pass through the fire. If he gave it to Molech but did not cause it to pass through the fire, or he caused it to pass through fire but did not give it to Molech, he incurs no penalty, unless he does both. “Molech” was the name given by a god worshipped by some of Israel’s neighbors. It is mentioned in Leviticus 20:2, where it specifically states that one who gives of his seed to Molech shall be stoned. It is also mentioned in Leviticus 18:21 and II Kings 23:10. According to the Rabbis “giving one’s seed to Molech” involved giving one’s child to the priests of Molech and their passing him from one side of a fire to another. The child was not consumed by the fire. (Although some commentators hold that this was a form of child sacrifice. For an interesting article on Biblical scholarship with regards to the cult of Molech, see the JPS Commentary on Leviticus). Our mishnah teaches that in order for the father to be obligated for the death penalty he must both give the child to the priests of Molech and cause the child to be passed through the fire. If he does only one of these he is not to be stoned.

עד שימסור ויעביר באש – as it says (Leviticus 18:21): “[Do not allow any of your offspring] to be offered up [to Molech, and do not profane the name of your God: I am the LORD],” and it is written there (Deuteronomy 18:10): “Let no one be found among you who consigns his son or daughter to the fire…” Just as consigning stated there is by fire, so to the consigning mentioned here is by fire.

A Ba'al Ob is the pithom who speaks from his armpit. The Yidde'oni is one who speaks from his mouth. These two are stoned; while he who inquires of them transgresses a formal prohibition. Leviticus 19:31 specifically warns that Israelites are not to make inquiry of the “Ovoth” or the “Yidde’onim”. These were different types of sorcerers or oracles who would conjure up spirits in order to tell the future. According to our mishnah a “Ba’al Ob”, or Master of the Ob” was a “pithom”, which in Greek means a conjurer. According to Rashi he would place a skull underneath his armpit and use it to predict the future. A “Yidde’oni” would also conjure up spirits but he would speak from his mouth. If an Israelite were to act as a conjurer of this sort he would be obligated for stoning. If an Israelite were to inquire of a “Ba’al Ob” or “Yidde’oni” he would transgress a negative commandment, but he would not be obligated for the death penalty.

אוב זה פיתום – to take the skull of the dead after the flesh had been consumed and make an idolatrous offering of incense with it and divine from it future events and it responds.

והמדבר משחיו – there are those who do it whereby the dead will respond via the arm-pit.

ידעוני – a creature whose name is known and its form is like that of a human being in its face, hands and feet, and it is attached at its navel to a cord that goes out from the root that is rooted in the ground and from there is its life, and when we wish to hunt it, we shoot arrows to the cord until it is broken and it dies immediately. And it is called in the language of the Sages, “a human being of the mountain” [for divination].

והנשאל בהם – who comes and ask to know through them and to tell him something of the future such as Saul (see I Samuel, chapter 28, where Saul consults with the witch of Endor).

באזהרה – (Leviticus 19:31): “Do not turn to ghosts [and do not inquire of familiar spirits, to be defiled by them: I the LORD am your God].”

עד שיקללם בשם – with one of the special names.

Introduction Mishnah eight deals with one who violates the Sabbath and one who curses his parents.

קללם בכינוי – “merciful,” “gracious,” “slow to anger” (see Exodus 34:7).

He who desecrates the Sabbath [is stoned], providing that it is an offence punished by “kareth” if deliberate, and by a sin-offering if unwitting. According to Numbers 15:35, one who breaks the Sabbath is punished by being stoned. However, we learn elsewhere that he is stoned only if he is warned prior to the transgression that if he violates the Sabbath in such a manner he will be stoned. Our mishnah teaches that this is true provided that his violation was one which is punished by “kareth” (a death penalty meted out by God) if not warned (but nevertheless committed with intent to break the Sabbath). He also must commit a transgression for which he is obligated to bring a sin-offering if he did it unwittingly (for instance he didn’t know that today was the Sabbath or that this type of work is prohibited). The seventh chapter of Tractate Shabbat lists which types of work one is prohibited from doing on the Sabbath. One who is warned not to do one of these types of work and does so anyway is to be stoned. There are other types of work which are forbidden to do on the Sabbath but are not punished by stoning.

One who curses His father or his mother is not punished unless he curses them by the divine name. If he cursed them by a nickname, Rabbi Meir held him liable, but the Sages ruled that he is exempt. According to Leviticus 20:9 and Exodus 21:17 one who curses his parents is liable for the death penalty. Our mishnah teaches that he is liable only if he curses them using God’s explicit name (which we no longer know). Although Rabbi Meir holds that he is obligated even if he uses a nickname for God, the Sages disagree.

עד שתהא נערה – and not a female minor younger than the age of twelve years and one day, nor an adult woman who has passed twelve years, sixth months and a day.

He who has sexual relations with a betrothed young woman is not punished until she is a young woman, a virgin, betrothed, and in her father's house.
If two men had sexual relations with her, the first is stoned, but the second is strangled.
Mishnah nine deals with a man who has relations with a betrothed virgin.
Deuteronomy 22:23-24 states: “In the case of a virgin who is betrothed to a man if a man comes upon her in town and lies with her, you shall take the two of them out to the gate of that town and stone them.” A man who has sexual relations with a betrothed woman is an adulterer, as is she, and they are both punishable by death. However, unlike a regular adulterer who is punished by strangulation, one who has relations with a betrothed woman is punished with a more serious form of the death penalty, stoning. Our mishnah teaches that in order for the two to be punished by stoning she must be betrothed and not married. She must be a virgin, and she must be a young woman, usually defined as being from the age of 12-12 ½. Older or younger than that and he will only be punished by strangulation. She also must still be residing in her father’s house. If she has already moved to her husband’s house she is considered married and adultery is then punished by strangulation.
If two men commit adultery with her the first is punished by being stoned and the second is punished by strangulation, since by the time he had relations with her she was no longer a virgin.

בתולה – and not a woman who is no longer a virgin, and if she had intercourse in an unnatural manner, she is still a virgin, and even if ten men came upon her altogether in an unnatural manner, they would all be punished by stoning.

מאורסה – but not married.

והיא בבית אביה – but if the father sent [her] to the agents of the husband, and he came upon her afterwards, [his punishment] is not by stoning, but by choking.

זה ההדיוט המסית – specifically an ordinary person who beguiles, as a prophet who beguiles, his death is by choking.

Introduction Mishnah ten deals with those who incite individuals or whole towns to commit idolatry.

והמסית את ההדיוט – not exactly, for we found no distinction between a person who entices an ordinary person to those who entices a prophet, but to exclude those who entice the many, such as those who lead astray a city in Israel, that their deaths are by choking.

One who incites [individuals to idolatry] -- this refers to an ordinary person who incites an individual who said, “There is an idol in such and such a place; it eats thus, it drinks thus, it does good [to those who worship it] and harm [to those who do not].” Deuteronomy 13:7-11 discusses an Israelite who attempts to incite his fellow Israelite to worship idols. According to our mishnah this is a regular individual (as opposed to a prophet) who attempts to incite another individual (as opposed to the entire town) to commit idolatry, by telling the other person about an idol that he intends to worship.

מכמינין – the language of lying in wait.

For all who are liable for the death penalty according to the Torah no witnesses are hidden to entrap them, excepting for this one. If he said [these things] to two, they themselves are witnesses against him, and he is brought to court and stoned. But if he said [these things] to one, he should reply, “I have friends who wish to do so likewise [come and propose it to them too].” But if he was cunning and declined to speak before them, witnesses are hidden behind a partition, while he [who was incited] says to him, make your proposal to me now in private. When the inciter says to him (repeats to him what he had already, the other replies, “How can we abandon our God in heaven to go and serve wood and stones?” Should he retract, it is well. But if he answers, “It is our duty [to worship idols], and is seemly for us”, then the witnesses stationed behind the partition take him to court, and have him stoned. Jewish law requires that all crimes, and certainly capital crimes, be witnessed by two people. However, due to the subversive nature of idol worship, the Rabbis allowed entrapping of one who was trying to incite others to worship idols. Such a form of entrapment was forbidden in all other cases. The reason that this was allowed in this case was to prevent one from inciting many individuals privately, thereby circumventing any possible punishment by the court. The mishnah now explains how this works. If he had incited two people directly, the two of them may bring him to court and he can be tried based on their testimony. If he incited one person, that person should first attempt to get the inciter to say the same thing to other people, and if he does they may bring him to court and testify against him. Should the inciter be clever and not repeat the same words in front of more than one person, the person who has already heard what the inciter said may hide witnesses behind a partition and encourage the inciter to repeat his words. Interestingly, the person who is being incited should even at this late stage try to get the inciter to recant. Jewish law is more interested in having the person recant and return to being part of the Jewish people than having him stoned. If he does not, however, recant, these witnesses may testify against him in a court of law, and if found guilty he will be stoned.

אם היה המסית ערום ואינו יכול לדבר בפניהם – that is to say, he says to the enticed that he cannot speak in their presence because of fear of the Jewish court.

He who incites [individuals to idolatry is one who] is one who says, “I will worship it”, or, “I will go and worship”, or, “let us go and worship”; or, “I will sacrifice [to it]”, “I will go and sacrifice”, “let us go and sacrifice”; “I will burn incense, “I will go and burn incense”; “let us go and burn incense”; or “I will make libations to it”, “I will go and make libations to it”, “let us go and make libations”; “I will prostrate myself before it”, “I will go and prostrate myself”, “let us go and prostrate ourselves”. This section lists all of the possible statements that are considered incitement. Basically it doesn’t matter if he states that he is going to do the idol worship or suggests that other do it with him, nor does it matter what type of worship it may be worshipping, sacrificing, bringing incense, making libations or bowing down, in any case he is considered an inciter and is liable for the death penalty of stoning. Note the similarity between this list and the list of forbidden types of worship in mishnah six.

ביחוד – that is to say, there is no person with us and you can say now what you have told me already.

One who seduces [a whole town to idolatry] is one who says, “Let us go and serve idols”. In Deuteronomy 13:13-19 a different type of inciter is discussed, one who incites an entire city to worship idols. The mishnah states that to be this type of inciter one must suggest in public that they all go and worship idols. If he had used singular language than his incitement does not fall into this category. We will discuss this case more when we learn chapter ten.

האומר אעבוד – in one of these linguistic formulations, he is an enticer and is liable.

המדיח – if he led the many astray, he is not guilty until he says in the plural form: “let us go and worship.”

העושה מעשה – an actual [deed], [is punished] by stoning.

Introduction Mishnah eleven deals with different forms of sorcery.

ולא האוחז את העינים – shows to other creatures as if he is doing, but is not actually doing anything.

A sorcerer, if he actually performs magic, is liable [to death], but not if he merely creates illusions. Rabbi Akiva says in Rabbi Joshua's name: “If two are gathering cucumbers [by magic] one may be punished and the other exempt: he who really gathers them is punished: while he who produces an illusion is exempt.” When the mishnah stated that a sorcerer is liable to be stoned, it meant one who actually performs magic, but not one who creates illusions. [Therefore, modern magicians who use illusions are not obligated for the death penalty]. Rabbi Akiva in the name of Rabbi Joshua illustrates this principle by mentioning a form of magic that must have been at least somewhat known in the time of the mishnah, something like pulling a rabbit out of a hat in our days.

שנים לוקטים קשואים – through witchcraft in our presence. One of them harvested and is liable for the death penalty, and his fellow harvested and is exempt from death. How so? He wo performed the deed of harvesting actually through witchcraft, is liable. האוחז את העינים – he showed us as if they were all gathered together in one place and the cucumbers did not move from their places. פטור – [exempt] from the death penalty.