Avodah Zarah 44a — the Talmud in English

And he said to them,

“And your sin” ![](pamud.bmp "

exact page location")

“which you committed—I took the calf and burned it in the fire, and I crushed it, grinding it thoroughly until it was fine as dust, and I cast its dust into the stream descending from the mountain.”

Now, the golden calf, even when it is burned, is still one solid mass; and although it does not become fertilizer, in any event it is not destroyed, and therefore he needed to grind it thoroughly—

And Rabbi Yosei brings proof from this that Moses our teacher ground it in order to scatter it to the wind, and was not concerned lest it become fertilizer.

They said to him

the Sages, to Rabbi Yosei:

“Is there proof from there?! For it says”

[Exodus 32] in the section of the calf:

“And he scattered it upon the surface of the water and made the Children of Israel drink it,”

therefore he was not concerned lest it become fertilizer.

And if you say: Why did he not cast it whole, and why did he need to grind it?—the answer is:

He intended only

to make the Children of Israel drink it—those who did not actually worship the calf, for the sons of Levi killed them with the sword—but rather those who embraced it and kissed it and rejoiced in their hearts; and the water performed its function

to test them like sotot

with unusual deaths and severe illnesses.

And this is the reason that he ground it and mixed it with the water.

The beraita brings another proof that Rabbi Yosei brought.

Rabbi Yosei said to them

the Sages:

“But is it not already stated”

[II Chronicles 15], concerning King Asa, who made a covenant with the people of Judah to seek the Lord, and there it says:

“And Maacah, the mother of Asa the king, he removed from being mistress”

[from being mistress]

“who had made a monstrous image for the Asherah; and Asa cut down her monstrous image and crushed it and burned it in the Kidron Valley.”

Thus, he was not concerned lest they use the monstrous image as fertilizer, although it was crushed and burned.

They said to him

the Sages, to Rabbi Yosei:

“Is there proof from there?! The Kidron Valley does not grow plants!”

And before the Gemara continues to bring the continuation of the beraita—

We raise an objection:

“Is that so?!”

Does the Kidron Valley not grow plants?!

And

we

learned

in a Mishna in tractate Yoma:

“These and these”

the remnants of the blood of the inner sin-offerings and the remnants of the blood of the outer sin-offerings, which are poured onto the base of the altar, and the blood exits through openings in the base of the altar onto the floor

“and mingle in the channel,”

a conduit for the exit of blood that was in the Temple courtyard,

“and

from there they

exit to the Kidron Valley, and are sold to gardeners as fertilizer”

with which to fertilize their gardens,

“and one commits misuse with them,”

meaning, it is forbidden to derive benefit from the blood without purchasing it from the treasurer.

Thus, the Kidron Valley does grow plants?

And we answer:

“It has various places”

in the Kidron Valley—

there is a place that grows plants, and there is a place that does not grow plants.

The blood went out to the Kidron Valley, to the place that grows plants, whereas Asa cast the monstrous image into the place that does not grow plants.

And the Gemara discusses:

What

is the meaning

of “her monstrous image”?

Rav Yehuda said:

It is a compound word—

for it was extraordinary mockery

extraordinary mockery—

And what was that mockery?

L

ike

Rav Yosef taught: She made something resembling a male organ for it

for this idol,

and it was intercourse with it every day.

The Gemara brings the continuation of the beraita.

Rabbi Yosei said to them

the Sages:

“But is it not already stated”

[II Kings 18], concerning King Hezekiah, who did what was upright in the eyes of the Lord: “He removed the high places and broke the pillars and cut down the Asherah,

and he crushed the bronze serpent that Moses had made,

for until those days the Children of Israel burned incense to it.”

Thus, he crushed it, and consequently it was scattered to the wind, and they did not cast it into the Dead Sea.

They said to him

the Sages, to Rabbi Yosei:

“Is there proof from there?!”

Although the Children of Israel burned incense to it, it was not forbidden for benefit. And why?

“For it says”

[Numbers 21]:

“And the Lord said to Moses: Make for yourself a fiery serpent”

And we derive from the fact that the Almighty did not say to him, “Make a serpent,” but rather, “Make

for yourself,”

that the Almighty commanded him that the serpent should be

from your own

bronze of Moses—

And

since

“a person cannot prohibit something that is not his,”

therefore the Children of Israel could not designate it as an idol, because it did not belong to them—and it was not forbidden for benefit, although they burned incense to it—

And there

with the bronze serpent—

it is the law

the truth is,

that

even

crushing it was not necessary,

for Hezekiah did not need to crush it, because it was not forbidden for benefit—

Rather,

why indeed did he crush it?

Since he saw

Hezekiah saw

that Israel were going astray after it

and attributing supernatural powers to it—

he arose and crushed it,

to publicize the matter and remove the people from their error, for they had worshiped idolatry in the days of Ahaz, his father.

And this is the reason that he crushed it, and no proof can be brought from there that an idol is sufficiently destroyed by crushing it.

He said to them

Rabbi Yosei to the Sages:

“But is it not already stated”

[II Samuel 5], concerning David’s victory over the Philistines, when they fled:

“And they left their idols there,

[a derogatory designation for idols]

and David and his men carried them away.”

And Rabbi Yosei held that they scattered them to the wind—

And from where is it evident

what is the meaning

that this expression, ‘and David carried them away,’ is an expression of scattering?

Its meaning is scattering to the wind.

And we explain:

A

s

Rav Yosef translates

who explains

Rav Yosef

the verse [Isaiah 41]:

“You shall scatter them, and the wind shall carry them away.”

And we translate: “You shall scatter them,”

you shall scatter them,

“and the wind shall whirl them away,”

it shall whirl them away—

Thus, David scattered them, and did not lead them to the Dead Sea.

They said to him

the Sages, to Rabbi Yosei,

“Is there proof from there?!”

“For it says”

[I Chronicles 14], where that same war against the Philistines is recounted, and it says in a different wording: “And they left their gods there, and David said,

‘Burn them in fire.’”

And the Sages expound the differences in the wordings, that the meaning is not that he first burned them and afterward carried them away—that is, scattered them to the wind—

And

from where do they derive this—

f

rom the fact

t

hat it is not

written

both in one verse,

“and he burned them and carried them away”?

It follows

that this is the meaning of the verses: At first he “said” to burn them, but they did not burn them; therefore:

“and they carried them away” literally,

they took them with them and benefited from them. [And the Gemara will explain why he commanded them to burn them, why they did not burn them, and how he was permitted to take them with him and benefit from them.]

And the Gemara discusses:

In any event,

although the Sages did not expound “and they carried them away” as meaning that he scattered them to the wind—

the verses contradict one another:

in one verse it says that David commanded them to burn them, implying that they were forbidden for benefit, while in the other verse it says that he carried them with him?

And we answer:

A

s

R

av Huna expounded—

as Rav Huna raised

Rav Huna raised

the contradiction between the verses:

“It is written, ‘And David said, and they shall burn them in fire,’ and it is written, ‘and they carried them away’?”

And he answers:

“It is not difficult. Here,”

the verse in which it is stated that David commanded them to burn them was

before Ittai the Gittite came,

a Philistine gentile who was among David’s friends, and David had no one who could nullify them; therefore he commanded them to burn them.

“Here,”

the verse in which it is stated that David took them with him was

after Ittai the Gittite came

and nullified them, in accordance with the law of the nullification of idolatry by a gentile; therefore David took them with him.

Therefore, the Sages hold that David did not scatter them to the wind, and they do not expound “and they carried them away” as an expression of scattering, but according to its plain meaning: he took them with him.

The Gemara brings Rav Naḥman’s exposition that Ittai the Gittite nullified the idols for King David.

For it is written

[II Samuel 12], concerning David’s war against Rabbah of the Children of Ammon and its capture:

“And he took the crown of their king from upon his head, and its weight was a talent of gold, with a precious stone, and it was upon David’s head.”

And what is stated, “their king,” means only “Milcom,” which was the name of the idol of the Children of Ammon, as it is called in the Book of Kings [I 11].

And

it is difficult:

“Who permitted it?”

Was it permitted to benefit from idols?

“They are objects forbidden for benefit!”

Is idolatry not forbidden for benefit?

Rav Naḥman said: “Ittai the Gittite came and nullified it.”

The Gemara expounds concerning the crown that David placed upon his head.

It is written:

“Its weight was a talent of gold”—

how could he place it

how could he carry it upon his head, for its weight was a talent, which is sixty maneh, and it was exceedingly heavy?

And we answer:

Rav Yehuda said in the name of Rav:

David indeed did not place it upon his head; rather, it was

fit to rest upon David’s head,

for it was made to the measure of his head and fitted it, as will be explained.

Rabbi Yosei bar Rabbi Ḥanina said: “There was a lodestone in it”

[a magnet]

“It carried it,”

carrying the crown above David’s head and appearing as though it rested upon his head.

Rav Elazar said:

The meaning of the verse is not that it weighed a talent of gold, but rather

there was a precious stone in it—

which was worth a talent of gold,

and what is stated, “its weight,” means its value.

The Gemara continues to expound concerning this crown.

King David, peace be upon him, said [Psalms 119]:

“This was mine, for I guarded Your precepts.”

What is he saying?

What is the “this” that was his as a reward for guarding the precepts of the Lord?

And we explain:

This is what he said:

so said David:

“As a reward for guarding Your precepts,”—

“this,”

the crown,

“was mine as testimony”

that I was fit for kingship.

And we explain:

“What was its testimony?”

What did it testify?

Rabbi Joshua ben Levi said: “He would place it”

in the groove in his head

“in the place of the tefillin,”—

“and it fitted him,”

and sat properly upon his head and corresponded to the measure of his head. The meaning is: Although the crown was completely round, and at the place of the tefillin the head is not round, nevertheless it sat upon his head—through a great miracle—as though it corresponded to the measure of his head. That is to say, by virtue of guarding the precepts of the Lord, it was shown from Heaven that he was indeed fit for kingship.

And we object: How could he place the crown in the place of the tefillin—

“But he needs to place”

he must place there

“tefillin?”

And we answer:

Rav Shmuel bar Rav Yitzḥak said: “There is room on the head to place two

boxes of

tefillin.”

And moving from one matter to another, the Gemara

brings

another exposition concerning the crown of the house of David.

It is stated about King Joash son of Ahaziah, who was hidden in the Temple when Athaliah, his grandmother, killed all the royal descendants: When he reached the age of seven, Jehoiada the koen brought him out of hiding, and they made him king over Judah. They rebelled against Athaliah, who had reigned for six years.

And it is stated there, when he appeared for the first time before the Levites and the heads of the fathers’ houses:

“And they brought out the king’s son and placed upon him the crown and the testimony,”

and they stood him upon the platform that was designated for the king, clapped their hands, and proclaimed before him, “Let the king live!”

And according to its plain meaning, “testimony” is the king’s Torah scroll.

And we expound:

“Crown”—this is the kalila

the crown of David—

“Testimony”—

Rav Yehuda said in the name of Rav:

This crown

is testimony for the house of David: whoever is fit for kingship,

the crown

fits him; and whoever is not fit for kingship—

the crown does not

fit

him.

And the crown fitted Joash, and it was testimony that he was fit for kingship.

And concerning this matter we expound another exposition.

It is stated at the beginning of the Book of Kings [I 1], when King David was old:

“And Adonijah”

[David’s son]

“son of Haggith exalted himself,”—

“saying: ‘I shall reign.’”

And we expound:

Rav Yehuda said in the name of Rav: “That he exalted himself”

[the version of the Bach:

“who sought”]

“to fit it,”

he wanted the crown to fit his head—

“but it did not fit him,”

it did not correspond to the measure of his head, being round, because he was not fit and suitable to reign.

The Gemara brings another exposition concerning Adonijah.

It is stated there, at the time of his exalting himself to reign:

“And he made for himself a chariot and horsemen and fifty men running before him.”

And the Gemara discusses:

“What was their greatness,”

what was the greatness in fifty men?

A tanna

taught:

“All of them”

were

without spleens,

their spleens had been removed by means of a drug, for the spleen weighs one down so that one cannot run,

“and with the soles of their feet engraved”—

they were

their flesh removed from the soles of their feet down to the bones, so that they could run over thorns and briers without feeling them.