Avodah Zarah 11a (יא.) — the Talmud in English

When Adrianus died,

when he died,

Adrianus, Rav said:

“The bundle has come apart.”

The Gemara relates what happened with Onkelos, who was also one of the prominent figures of Rome and converted to Judaism.

Onkelos bar Kelonimos converted to Judaism,

he converted.

The Roman emperor sent,

the Roman emperor sent

a Roman troop,

a troop of Roman soldiers

after him,

to seize him and bring him to the emperor.

He drew them in with verses,

he drew them in through passages of Scripture, proving to them from the sacred texts that the religion of Israel is true and eternal,

and they converted.

The Roman soldiers were drawn after him and converted as well.

The emperor then sent again,

the emperor returned to the matter and sent

a Roman troop [

another ],

a different one

after him,

after him, and the emperor commanded them,

“Do not engage him in debate or say anything to him.”

Do not enter into arguments with him!

When they had taken him and were going,

when they took him and began walking,

he said to them,

Onkelos said to them: I will not debate with you; rather,

“Let me tell you an ordinary matter.”

I will tell you something in passing! Thinking that the emperor had not forbidden them to hear such a thing, they listened to him.

He said to them:

“A minor official,

a minor official,

holds a torch,

holds a torch

before a higher official,

before an official greater than he, to illuminate the way before him in his honor. And similarly,

a higher official does so before a duke,

an official greater than he, and so

a duke does so before a governor,

and

a governor

does so

before the king,

the king—

“The king—

does he hold a torch before ordinary people

does the king hold a torch before people?

The soldiers said to him

the soldiers said to Onkelos:

“No!”

Onkelos said to the soldiers

Onkelos said to the soldiers:

“The Holy One, blessed be He, holds a torch,

holds a torch to illuminate

before Israel, as it is written [

Exodus 13 ]

“And the Lord went before them by day in a pillar of cloud to lead them along the way, and by night in a pillar of fire to illuminate for them.”

In this way he demonstrated to them how greatly the people of Israel are beloved and esteemed in the eyes of the Holy One, blessed be He.

They converted [

all of them ],

They too recognized the truth of his path and converted.

He then sent again,

he returned and sent

another troop after him,

another troop after him.

He commanded them,

and instructed them:

“Do not speak with him at all!”

Do not say anything to him!

When they took him and began walking,

when they took him and began walking,

he saw a mezuzah,

he saw the mezuzah [

which was placed at the entrance

which was placed at the entrance ],

he placed his hand upon it,

Onkelos placed his hand upon the mezuzah,

and said to them: “What is this?”

What is this? [Another version

he laughed,

he laughed, and

said to them: “Why am I laughing

why am I laughing?].

In this way he drew them into speaking with him.

They said to him,

they said to Onkelos:

“You tell us.”

Tell us yourself!

Onkelos said to them

Onkelos:

“The usual practice of the world is that a king,

who is

flesh and blood, sits inside,

in his palace,

while his servants guard him from outside. But the Holy One, blessed be He: His servants are inside, and He guards them from outside.”

For the mezuzah guards them from harmful forces, as

it is stated [

Psalms 121 ]

“The Lord shall guard your going out and your coming in from now and forever.”

They converted.

They too converted.

He no longer sent troops after him,

he did not again send troops to seize him.

The Gemara now returns to Antoninus and Rabbi.

The prophet announced to Rebecca [Genesis 25]

“And the Lord

said to her: ‘Two nations are in your womb,’”

and we expound:

Rav Yehuda said in the name of Rav: Do not read “goyim” [nations], but rather “

ge'im,”

from the expression “proud,” meaning two prominent, distinguished men,

this is Antoninus,

who descended from Esau,

and Rabbi,

who descended from Jacob. And both of them were exceedingly wealthy,

so that the following never ceased from their tables

neither lettuce [

lettuce ]

nor cucumber nor radish—

neither in the summer nor in the winter .

The advantage of these vegetables is that they aid digestion.

For the Master said: “A radish cuts up food,”

it grinds up food in the intestines.

“Lettuce turns over

the

food. A cucumber expands

the

intestines .

The Gemara asks: How could they say that cucumbers benefit the body?

For it was taught in the school of Rabbi Yishmael: “Why are they called kishuin [cucumbers]? Because they are as hard on a person’s body as swords.”

Thus, they do not benefit the body!?

The Gemara answers:

“This is not difficult. This,

what was said in the beraita, that they are harmful to the body, refers to

large ones,

large cucumbers.

And this,

what never ceased from the tables of Rabbi and Antoninus, refers to

small ones.

small cucumbers.

We learned in our Mishna:

“The day of birth and the day of death”—the words of Rabbi Meir. And the Sages say: “Any death accompanied by burning involves idol worship, and one not accompanied by burning does not involve idol worship.”

The Gemara now analyzes the dispute between Rabbi Meir and the Sages. Certainly, they did not disagree about the facts—whether all kings were mourned by burning or not—for Rabbi Meir surely concedes that there were kings for whom objects were burned and kings for whom they were not. Rather, the Gemara initially assumes that the basis of their dispute is as follows: Rabbi Meir holds that the festival of idol worship is established by the king’s death itself, and that it is not the burning that makes it a festival. Rabbi Meir maintains that burning objects for a king is not one of the gentile rites performed for idol worship and is unrelated to idol worship. The Sages, however, hold that burning is one of the gentile rites performed for idol worship, and only it causes the day to be made a festival of idol worship, not the king’s death itself.

The Gemara infers:

From

these words of the Sages, you learn

that Rabbi Meir holds: It makes no difference whether the death is accompanied by burning or whether it is not—

they worship through it,

they worship following such a death

as idol worship,

and they establish it as a permanent festival throughout the reign of his son who rules in his place.

Evidently,

it is apparent from here that Rabbi Meir holds that

burning is not a rite.

The act of burning itself is not one of the gentile rites performed for idol worship.

And

from

this you learn

that the Rabbis hold: Burning is a rite,

one of the gentile rites performed for idol worship, and it is what makes the day a festival—

But this is difficult: If burning is one of the gentile rites performed for idol worship, how was it permitted to do so for the kings of Israel?

But it was taught in a beraita: “We burn objects for kings

the kings of Israel,

and there is no need

to be concerned that it is forbidden

because of

any

“ways of the Amorite,”

which the Torah forbade adopting the practices of the Amorites, as it is stated [Exodus 23]: “And I will bring you to the Amorite, the Hittite, the Perizzite, the Canaanite, the Hivite, and the Jebusite, and I will annihilate him. You shall not bow to their gods and you shall not worship them, and you shall not act according to their practices.” That is, in addition to the prohibition against worshipping idols, it is also forbidden to act according to their practices. This prohibition is called “the ways of the Amorite.”

But this is difficult:

And if it is a rite

for idols,

how do we,

we, the children of Israel,

burn,

how do we burn objects for our kings?

But it is written [

Leviticus 18 ] “

And in their rites

of the gentiles

you shall not walk”!?

The Gemara answers: Burning objects for kings is not a rite performed for idol worship; rather, it is done because of their importance, expressing the greatness of their stature and the depth of the grief over their death.

Rather,

everyone

—Rabbi Meir and the Sages—hold:

burning is not a rite

performed for idol worship,

but is an expression of honor—

And

in what do Rabbi Meir and the Sages disagree?—

Here, this is the basis of their dispute:

they disagree about this reason:

Rabbi Meir holds: It makes no difference

between

a death accompanied by burning, and it makes no difference

between

a death not accompanied by burning—

they worship through it as idol worship.

They make it a festival. Although that king was not sufficiently important for objects to be burned for him, they nevertheless make his death a festival of idol worship.

And

if

the Sages hold: A death accompanied by burning is significant to them,

the king is important to them,

and they worship through it,

they make it a festival.

But one not accompanied by burning is not significant to them, and they do not worship through it,

and they do not make it a festival.

The Gemara now cites the beraita in which we learned, “We burn objects for kings,” in its entirety and explains it.

The body of the matter: “We burn objects for kings

the kings of Israel,

and there is no

in this act

the prohibition of

the prohibition against performing

the ways of the Amorite.”

As

it is stated,

the beraita proves this from what the prophet said [Jeremiah 34] in the word of the Lord to King Zedekiah,

“You shall die in peace, and with the burnings for your fathers, the earlier kings who preceded you, so shall they burn for you.”

The beraita continues:

“And just as we burn objects for kings—

so we burn objects for the leaders,

the leaders of Israel who lived during the Second Temple period and afterward.

And what do they burn for kings? Their beds and their personal utensils.”

And there was an incident

that

Rabban Gamliel the Elder died,

the leader of Israel,

and Onkelos the convert burned for him seventy maneh of Tyrian silver [

a measure of silver ].

Apparently, this means that Onkelos burned actual money for him. Therefore, we ask:

But you said: “What do they burn for him? His bed and his personal utensils,”

and not other things. How, then, could the beraita cite an incident that contradicts itself? The Gemara answers: He did not burn money for him; rather,

say

that the meaning of the beraita is that he burned his bed and personal utensils

worth

the value of

seventy maneh of Tyrian silver.

The beraita stated that they burn his bed and personal utensils—

The Gemara asks:

“And nothing else?!”

Do they not destroy other things for him?!

But it was taught in a beraita: “They uproot

they uproot and cut the tendons of an animal’s feet

for kings. And there is no

prohibition in this act

because of the ways of the Amorite.”

Thus, besides his personal utensils, they destroyed other things as well?

The Gemara answers:

Rav Pappa said:

Indeed, the reference is to his personal utensils, and it concerns

a horse that he rode

the king.

The Gemara challenges this answer:

And

when

a kosher animal,

which is not ridden and is not among the king’s personal utensils,

do they not

uproot its tendons?!

But it was taught in a beraita: “Uprooting that causes an animal to become tereifa,

through which the animal becomes tereifa,

is forbidden

to perform, because it is forbidden to cause a kosher animal to become tereifa, even if it is not intended for his eating or benefit.

And

if the uprooting is

one that does not cause tereifa,

through which the animal does not become tereifa, as will be explained,

it is permitted.

And what is uprooting that does not cause tereifa?