Sanhedrin 26a (כו.) — the Talmud in English

And the townspeople understood the hint,

and everyone hid

themselves.

When he came,

when the city official arrived,

he said to him

Rabbi Zeira’s father said to the city official:

“From whom shall we collect?!”

From whom should the money be collected? After all, the residents of the city were few. And the city official was satisfied with a small amount.

When his soul departed,

at the time of Rabbi Zeira’s father’s death,

he said to them,

he instructed his household:

“Take”

take

thirteen coins

thirteen coins

that I tied in my sheet

that I tied in my sheet and safeguarded,

and return them

and return them

to so-and-so,

to a certain person,

from whom I took them

from whom I took them,

and I did not need them

and I did not need to give them to the city official.

And this was his righteousness and integrity.

We learned in our Mishna:

Rabbi Shimon said: At first, they would call them Gatherers of Sabbatical produce,

but when the extortionists became numerous, they reverted to calling them Merchants of Sabbatical produce.

And the Gemara explains:

What is Rabbi Shimon saying?

What is meant by “at first,” and what is meant by “at the end”? Who were the extortionists, whom did they call Gatherers of Sabbatical produce and Merchants of Sabbatical produce, and what difference does it make what they are called?

It is permitted to gather shevi’it produce for the purpose of eating it. When the time of removal arrives, when that species is no longer found in the fields, each species at its appropriate time, one must remove it [according to Rashi, Pesachim 52b, this means declaring it ownerless in a place where wild animals and domesticated animals can reach it]. It is forbidden to conduct commerce with shevi’it produce, as it is stated: “The Sabbath produce of the land shall be yours to eat,” and we expound: “to eat,” but not for commerce.

Rav Yehuda said: This is what Rabbi Shimon is saying:

Rabbi Shimon means:

At first,

the Sages

would say: Gatherers of Sabbatical produce

for the purpose of eating it

are fit.

Merchants are disqualified.

When they became numerous,

the extortionists, who were

those who provided money to the poor, and the poor went and gathered it for them,

meaning that they paid the poor to gather the shevi’it produce for them,

and brought it to them,

and brought them the produce in exchange for the money; through this, they were “Merchants of Sabbatical produce.”

They reverted to saying

that those who had previously been called Gatherers would be called Merchants,

and both this and that,

both the actual merchants and those who gathered for themselves, were

disqualified.

But the Gemara raises a difficulty from the wording of the Mishna.

The sons of Reḥava

had difficulty

with it,

with this interpretation:

“Are these”

indeed

the

ones who provide money to the poor

“when the extortionists became numerous”?

After all,

“when the merchants became numerous”

would have been more appropriate,

it should have said,

for Rabbi Shimon to say.

And the Gemara offers another explanation.

Rather,

even

at first they would say: Both this and that

both actual merchants and those who gathered for their own needs, were

disqualified,

because they provided money to the poor.

But

when the extortionists became numerous—and who were they? The arnona—

the king coerced the landowners to provide a fixed number of kor of produce from the land each year as a tax. Consequently, they did not gather shevi’it produce with the intention of violating a prohibition, but for the sake of the king’s taxes; therefore, they were not suspected of giving false testimony.

Before the Gemara finishes explaining Rabbi Shimon’s statement, it brings proof that they had to deal with arnona, on account of which they permitted a prohibition involving shevi’it.

As

for example,

Rabbi Yannai would proclaim: “Go out”

go out to the fields

and sow during the Sabbatical year, on account of arnona.

The Gemara now returns to explain Rabbi Shimon’s statement.

Therefore—

they reverted to saying: Gatherers—

are fit. Merchants

actual merchants

are disqualified. [The interpretation of the Mishna is: They reverted to calling those who are disqualified from bearing witness Merchants of Sabbatical produce. That is, only they are disqualified].

And the explanation of the Mishna is: They went back to calling those who are disqualified from bearing witness merchants of produce of the Sabbatical Year. That is, only they are disqualified.]

The Gemara relates a story concerning shevi’it.

Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Zarnuki and Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak were going

on their way

to intercalate the year in Assia .

Reish Lakish encountered them

and met them,

and joined them,

accompanying them, because

he said: “I will go”

I will go

and see

and observe

how they perform the procedure,

how they conduct their actions in intercalating the year.

He saw

Reish Lakish saw

a certain man

a certain man

who was plowing,

plowing his field during the Sabbatical year. Reish Lakish objected

and said to them

to Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Zarnuki and Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak:

“A priest—and plowing!”

This is a priest who is plowing during the Sabbatical year [and the Gemara will explain that priests were suspected concerning shevi’it].

They said to him

Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Zarnuki and Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak said to Reish Lakish:

He can

the man plowing can justify himself

and say: “I am a hired laborer on it.”

I am merely a hired laborer, and the land belongs to a gentile. Alternatively, he is a hired laborer for the landowner, working his land for arnona, as explained above, that work was permitted on account of arnona.

Again,

once more

he saw

Reish Lakish saw

a certain man

a certain man

who was pruning in a vineyard,

cutting dry grapevine branches. This is forbidden during the Sabbatical year, as it is a derivative of sowing, since it benefits the growth of the vines.

Reish Lakish objected

and said to them

to Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Zarnuki and Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak:

“A priest—and pruning!”

This is a priest who is pruning during the Sabbatical year.

They said to him

Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Zarnuki and Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak said to Reish Lakish:

He can

the one pruning can justify himself and

say

that he is not pruning for the sake of agricultural work, but

“I need it for the olive press frame.”

I need the branches for work in the olive press, to make ropes from them with which to bind the mass of olives when a beam is placed upon it to press them. This is not a derivative of sowing and is permitted during the Sabbatical year.

Reish Lakish responded to them and

said to them: “The heart knows whether”

he is doing this

for the frame,

or

for crookedness,

to violate the prohibition of shevi’it. [That is, they went to excessive lengths in finding merit for transgressors].

Before the Gemara continues the story, it clarifies the order of events, and also why he said to them, “A priest.”

Which

of the two

did he say to them first,

at the beginning—about the one who was plowing or about the one who was pruning?

If you say

if it is said that

the first one,

the first incident, “A priest—and plowing,”

he said to them first,

and afterward he said, “A priest—and pruning,” as the story relates,

also in this case

with regard to the one pruning,

let them say

they could have found merit and said:

“I am a hired laborer on it”?

Rather,

the order of the events must be reversed:

this one,

the one pruning,

he said to him first,

this happened first,

and afterward he said this to them,

“A priest—and plowing,” since it was impossible to say that he needed the wood, or to offer a similar justification; therefore, they offered a new explanation, that he could say, “I am a hired laborer on it.”

And the Gemara explains:

Why specifically a priest?

Why did he tell them that he was a priest? After all, the prohibition of shevi’it applies to every Israelite.

Because

priests

are suspected concerning shevi’it,

concerning the prohibition of shevi’it. Since they permit themselves what is forbidden, thinking that just as teruma and sacrificial offerings of the highest sanctity were permitted to them, so too shevi’it, which possesses the sanctity of Eretz Yisrael, is permitted to them.

The Gemara proves that priests are suspected concerning shevi’it—and therefore the Sages imposed greater stringency upon them.

As it was taught:

Teruma is nullified in one hundred. That is, if a se’a of teruma fell into one hundred se’a of non-sacred produce, and the teruma is not discernible, it is nullified in the majority, and all one hundred se’a may be eaten by Israelites. But if it fell into fewer than one hundred, it is not nullified and is forbidden to Israelites. In that case, all the se’a are sold [with the teruma among them] to priests. The sale is at a low price, meaning below their market value, because there are few buyers—only priests—and they obtain teruma for free.

The beraita discusses teruma that fell into shevi’it produce while it is still permitted to eat it, that is, before the time of removal.

A se’a of teruma that fell into one hundred se’a of shevi’it—

shall be raised,

meaning, it is nullified, and all the se’a may be eaten by non-priests. But if it fell

into fewer than this,

fewer than one hundred se’a, in which case it is not nullified—

they shall rot.

They must leave them until they rot, and it is forbidden to eat them.

And we raised a difficulty concerning it,

and when we were discussing that sugya, we asked:

“Why should they rot?!”

Is there not another solution, namely, that

he should sell it to a priest for the value of teruma

at a low price, so that the owner of the produce receives a low price for the non-sacred shevi’it produce? It is permitted to sell shevi’it produce [occasionally ], provided it is eaten before the time of removal,

except for the value of that se’a

of teruma, which it is forbidden to sell, because the mitzva of giving teruma to a priest requires giving it for free. Why, then, should it rot?

And Rabbi Ḥiyya said in the name of Ulla: This indicates that

this has been newly established here:

priests were suspected concerning shevi’it, [that is,

they might keep it until after the time of removal ].

Therefore he said, “A priest—and plowing,” and “A priest—and pruning.”

The Gemara now returns to the story:

They said

Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Zarnuki and Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak said about Reish Lakish:

“He is a vexatious man!”

He is contentious and troubles us with his words. Therefore,

when they arrived there,

when they reached the upper chamber in which the year was intercalated, and did not want Reish Lakish to trouble them,

they went up to the roof,

they went up to the upper chamber,

and they pulled up the ladder from beneath it,

they raised the ladder, so that Reish Lakish could not climb up to them.

Reish Lakish came

Reish Lakish

before

before

Rabbi Yoḥanan and said to him,

Reish Lakish said to Rabbi Yoḥanan:

“People who are suspected concerning shevi’it,

that is, those who defend the wicked who work their fields during the Sabbatical year—are they

fit to intercalate a year?!”

He reconsidered

and

said: “I have no difficulty,”

because

it is analogous

this matter is similar

to the three cattle herders

whose story is related in the second chapter [18b], who were heard by the Sages saying that the spring season had not yet arrived.

And the Rabbis relied on their calculations.

They relied on their expertise concerning the seasons and their calculations. Just as they relied there on the three cattle herders, so too it is possible to rely on Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Zarnuki and Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak.

And he reconsidered again,

and once again he changed his mind and

said: “This case is not comparable”

to that case, because

there,

there the Sages heard their opinion [and even without their opinion they would have intercalated the year, as explained there],

and afterward the Sages deliberated,

the Sages then reconvened and reached a decision by the required quorum—three, five, or seven—for intercalating the year,

and intercalated that year,

that particular year. But this is not so

here,

in the incident involving Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Zarnuki and Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak. How can they be relied upon for intercalating the year? After all,

it is a conspiracy of wicked people, and a conspiracy of wicked people is not included in the quorum;

they are not trustworthy, and a court requires trustworthy members.

Rabbi Yoḥanan said: “That is the trouble,”

this is the calamity—that you call them wicked.

When they came,

when Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Zarnuki and Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak arrived

before

before

Rabbi Yoḥanan, they said to him,

to Rabbi Yoḥanan: Reish Lakish

calls us “cattle herders,” and the Master said nothing at all?!

You did not protest against him?!

He said to them,

Rabbi Yoḥanan said to them:

“And if he had called you”

if he had called

‘shepherds,’

who are even inferior to cattle herders,

what could I have said to him?

What could I have said to him?

The Gemara now explains:

What is the meaning of “a conspiracy of wicked people”?

Where do we find that a conspiracy of wicked people is not included in the quorum?

During the siege that Sennacherib, king of Assyria, laid against Jerusalem in the days of King Hezekiah, as recorded in the book of Kings [chapter 18, verse 20] and in the book of Isaiah [chapter 36, verse 9], Rabshakeh came as the emissary of the king of Assyria and blasphemed and reviled the God of Israel and His holy people and heritage. It is related there that he wished to speak with King Hezekiah: “And Eliakim son of Hilkiah, who was over the household, and Shebna the scribe, and Joah son of Asaph the recorder, went out to him.” It is written there several times that they were the king Hezekiah’s representatives and messengers.

In the book of Isaiah [chapter 22], it is written that God sent Isaiah the prophet to Shebna, who was over the household, cursing him with forceful curses, and transferred his office to Eliakim son of Hilkiah. But it is not stated there why he cursed him, what sin he had committed, or what had caused him to sin.

The Gemara explains his actions here and expounds part of the verses, as well as the statement that “a conspiracy of wicked people is not included in the quorum.”

Shebna,

the official in charge of the king’s household,

would lecture

would lecture

before thirteen myriads,

before 130,000 people. Whereas

Hezekiah,

the king,

would lecture

would lecture

before eleven myriads,

before 110,000 people.

When

Sennacherib

came and besieged Jerusalem, Shebna wrote a note,

a note,

cast

and sent it

with an arrow

by means of an arrow to Sennacherib, and it said:

“Shebna and his faction

and his men [who were more numerous than Hezekiah’s men]

have surrendered

to you and wish to serve you. Whereas

Hezekiah and his faction have not surrendered.”

And this is derived from what is stated in the book of Psalms:

“For behold, the wicked bend the bow; they prepare their arrow upon the string.”

That is, by means of an arrow he revealed his wickedness, informing against his master, King Hezekiah.

Hezekiah was afraid

he was afraid

of him

of Shebna.

He said: “Perhaps, Heaven forbid, the inclination of

the inclination

His will

His will

the Holy One, blessed be He, is inclined after

Shebna, because he is the

majority,

since most of the people are with Shebna, and he thought that he must follow the majority,

and since the majority are surrendering,

they wish to surrender to Sennacherib,

they

he and his faction

too are surrendering,

they too must surrender.

The prophet came

Isaiah 6

and said

to him:

“You shall not say, ‘A conspiracy,’ concerning all that this people says, ‘A conspiracy.’”

Do not think in your mind that the number of Shebna’s followers is considered a majority,

that is, it is a conspiracy of the wicked,

a joining together of the wicked,

and a conspiracy of the wicked is not included in the count,

as they are not considered a majority .

Shebna went

to

to hew himself a grave in the graves of the House of David,

In his great arrogance, wishing to rebel against the monarchy, he wanted to be buried in the graves of the kings.

A prophet came

and encountered him at the burial site

and said to him: “What do you have here, and who do you have here, that you have hewn yourself a grave here?”

You do not belong to the royal family, and your relatives are not buried here.

It is also written there that the prophet said to him:

“Behold, the Lord

shall hurl you with a mighty hurling.”

Rav said: The displacement of a man is harsher

more severe

than that of a woman

than a woman’s displacement .

It is also written there:

“And your crown he crowns”

[According to its plain meaning, Rashi explained there that it is from the expression “bird”; they will cause you to fly into exile like a bird.] And we expound:

Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said

The verse

teaches

us

, that leprosy broke out upon him. It is written here: “And your crown he crowns,” and it is written there

in the passage concerning the person afflicted with leprosy:

“And he shall cover his upper lip”

and we expound: Just as there, the reference is to leprosy, so here, the reference is to leprosy.

It is also written there:

“He shall surely hurl you with a hurling, like a ball, into a broad land,

there you shall die, and there, instead of your glorious chariots, there shall be the disgrace of your master’s house.” “Hurling” is from the expression for a turban, meaning that the armies of Sennacherib will whirl you around like a ball, as a wall , to exile you to a broad land; there you shall die, and there, in place of his glorious chariots, there will be disgrace for the house of his master.

A tanna

we learned in a beraita:

He sought

the

disgrace of his master’s house

and wished to rebel against Hezekiah,

therefore his honor was transformed

for he thought that if he made peace with Sennacherib, he would receive honor

into disgrace.

And how did this happen?

When he was going out,

when Shebna came to leave the city with his faction, and went out ahead of his faction, and when he was outside,

Gabriel came,

the angel,

and seized

the door,

closing the city gates

in the face of his troops,

so that they could not leave.