Sanhedrin 45a — the Talmud in English

Gemara:

The man is covered with one section

that is, a small part of him

in front.

And

the

woman

is covered

with two sections, both in front and behind, because she is entirely nakedness,

since the place of nakedness is visible also from behind her,

the words of

Rabbi Judah.

And the Sages say: The man is stoned naked, but the woman is not stoned naked.

And the Gemara discusses:

What is the reason of the Sages

that the woman is not stoned naked?

And the Gemara answers:

The verse says [Leviticus 24:14] “

“

And they shall stone him.”

What is meant by “

him”?

What does it come to exclude, that it is only him and not her?

If you say

that they stone only

him and not her,

that the woman is not judged at all by stoning—

It is impossible to say so.

But it is written explicitly [Deuteronomy 17:5]: “

“

And you shall take out that man or that woman,

and you shall stone them with stones, and they shall die”!

Rather, what does it come to exclude, “

“

him”?

To say: only him do they stone

without his garment [“him” implies as he is, naked].

for “him” indicates him as he is, naked].

But her they stone

they stone

with her garment.

Whereas

Rabbi Judah says, “him” does not come to exclude “her,” but comes to state the actual law:

“him”—

without his garment.

For he is stoned naked.

And since there is no exclusion here concerning the woman, automatically we return to the general principle, that Scripture made the woman equal to the man for all punishments in the Torah, and therefore

it makes no difference whether a man or whether a woman

is stoned naked.

And the Gemara discusses:

Is this to say that the Sages are concerned about sinful thoughts, whereas Rabbi Judah is not concerned about sinful thoughts!?

Shall we explain their dispute as follows: the Sages hold that we are concerned lest people come to entertain thoughts about the woman when they see her being stoned naked; for otherwise the Sages would not have said that the woman is not stoned naked, since although the Torah does not require stoning her naked, we should nevertheless have independently done so, so that she would die quickly and not suffer?

And Rabbi Judah holds that one is not concerned about the sinful thoughts of the men, and therefore he permits stoning her naked?

This cannot be said.

But we have heard the opposite from them!

Elsewhere we find their positions concerning the fear of sinful thoughts to be the opposite.

For we learned

in tractate Sota [7a]:

The priest grasps her garments

of the suspected woman at the place of the collar and pulls;

if they were torn,

the garments with an ordinary tear—

they were torn,

and he need not be concerned about that.

And if they were ripped apart

into many tears—

they were ripped apart.

Until he uncovers her heart.

And

likewise

he loosens

the braids of

her hair.

And all this is in order to disgrace the suspected woman.

Rabbi Judah says: If her heart was beautiful—

he would not have

the priest

uncover it. And if her hair was beautiful, he would not loosen it.

Because we are concerned about sinful thoughts among those surrounding her.

Thus, their positions here are the opposite: the Sages are not concerned about sinful thoughts, whereas Rabbi Judah is concerned about sinful thoughts.

And the Gemara answers:

Rabba said: There

in the case of the suspected woman

this is the reason

that Rabbi Judah is concerned about sinful thoughts, because

perhaps she will leave

the suspected woman

acquitted from the court.

For the water will examine her and show that she is pure,

and

then

the young priests will be incited by her [young priests who see her thus in the Temple courtyard], and they will pursue her all her days.

[the young members of the priestly family who see her in this state in the Temple courtyard], and they may pursue her all her life.

But

here, she is being killed.

For she is immediately stoned, and therefore there is no concern that they will entertain thoughts about her.

And if you would say: They will be incited by other women,

if you say that there is concern that, because they saw her naked, their inclination will be aroused toward other women—

Behold,

Rabba said: It is a received tradition

from my teachers that

the evil inclination rules only over one whom his eyes see.

And therefore there is no concern that they will be incited by other women.

Rava said:

And is it only

Rabbi Judah against Rabbi Judah that is difficult,

whereas

the Sages against the Sages is not difficult?

Was the difficulty only a contradiction in the words of Rabbi Judah? Surely there is also a contradiction in the view of the Sages, and concerning it Rabba does not answer.

Rather, Rava said: Rabbi Judah against Rabbi Judah is not difficult, as we answered,

as Rabba answered.

The Sages against the Sages is also not difficult.

Because

the verse says [Ezekiel 23:48]: “

“

And I shall discipline all the women, and they shall not act according to your lewdness.”

There is a mitzva to disgrace the suspected woman and uncover her heart, so that other women will learn discipline from her, to be modest; and even on the possibility that she is pure and did not commit adultery, in any event she acted licentiously when she secluded herself with another man.

But

here, you have no discipline greater than this.

For the women see how she is stoned, and therefore there is no need to disgrace her further and stone her naked. And in every case, the reason is not concern about sinful thoughts.

And if you would say: Let us do two things to her,

if you would still object that also concerning one who is stoned we should say that they should stone her naked, so that there will be discipline for the women through her being disgraced in addition to her being killed—

Rav Nahman said in the name of Rabba bar Avuha: The verse says “

And you shall love your fellow as yourself”—

And you shall love your fellow as yourself”—

choose for him

a fitting death!

And do not disgrace him.

And the Gemara objects:

Shall we say that Rav Nahman’s statement is subject to a dispute among tannaim!?

Shall we say that Rav Nahman’s exposition, that one must choose for him a fitting death, is disputed by tannaim? For apparently Rabbi Judah disagrees with this, since he holds that they stone her naked, despite the fact that she is thereby disgraced.

And the Gemara answers:

No,

rather,

everyone accepts Rav Nahman’s statement

and all agree with his exposition.

And here, they disagree concerning this matter,

the Sages and Rabbi Judah:

One master holds: A person’s disgrace is more grievous to him than the comfort of his body.

The Sages hold that a person finds his disgrace more difficult than the suffering of his body; therefore it is preferable for the woman to be stoned while clothed and not to be disgraced, even though this causes her suffering, as she will die more slowly. And this is the fitting death that we choose for her.

And one master holds: The comfort of his body is preferable to his disgrace.

A person finds it more difficult to endure bodily suffering than to endure disgrace; therefore the choice of the fitting death is that she be stoned naked, so that she will die quickly, even though she is thereby disgraced.

Mishna:

The place of stoning was the height of two stories

of a man’s height, and from there they throw him to the ground.

One of the witnesses pushes him on his hips

that is, from behind him.

And if

he turned onto his heart,

he fell with his face toward the ground,

the witness turns him

onto his hips,

so that his back will be toward the ground, because it is degrading for him to lie thus with his face toward the ground.

And if he died through it

from the fall alone,

he has fulfilled his obligation.

The mitzva of stoning has been fulfilled in his case.

And if not,

if he has not yet died, then the

second witness takes the stone and places it upon his heart,

throwing it forcefully upon his heart.

If he died through it, he has fulfilled his obligation.

And if not, his stoning is performed by all Israel,

for all Israel add to his stoning with stones.

As it is stated [Deuteronomy 17:7]: “

“

The hand of the witnesses shall be against him first to put him to death, and the hand of all the people

last.”

Gemara:

A tannay taught: And his height.

The height of the place of stoning must be increased also by the height of the one being stoned himself, because they threw him while he was standing and not while he was sitting. And it follows that together with the two stories of the place of stoning,

there are here three

stories.

And the Gemara discusses:

Do we require all this?

Does such a height have to be used to cause death?

And we raise a contradiction

from that which we learned in tractate Bava Kamma [50b]: One who digs a pit, or a ditch, or a cave, and an ox or a donkey falls there, is liable. If so, why is “pit” stated in the Torah? To tell you:

Just as a pit, which is sufficient to cause death,

just as a pit contains sufficient depth to cause death, namely

ten handbreadths,

for an unspecified pit is at least ten handbreadths deep,

so too every

type of excavation must

contain enough to cause death.

That is, its depth must be at least

ten handbreadths.

And for less than this one is not liable for it.

It follows that a fall from a height of only ten handbreadths is sufficient to cause death; why, then, was it necessary to throw the one being stoned from a height of two stories?

And the Gemara answers:

Rav Nahman said in the name of Rabba bar Avuha: The verse says “

And you shall love your fellow as yourself” \-

And you shall love

your fellow as yourself— -

Choose for him a fitting death!

That he should die quickly and his suffering should be eased; therefore they throw him from such a great height.

And the Gemara objects:

If so, let us raise it higher still!

Let us make the place of stoning even higher and ease his death still further?

And the Gemara answers:

Because he would be disfigured.

If it were too high, he would come to disgrace, as his body would be shattered into limbs.

We learned in the Mishna:

One of the witnesses pushes him.

The Sages taught: From where is it derived that there is pushing?

Those who touch Mount Sinai at the time of the giving of the Torah, concerning whom it is stated, “No hand shall touch it, for he shall surely be stoned or surely be cast down”—from where is it derived that they are judged to be killed by pushing from a high place?

The verse states “

he shall be cast down,”

a language of throwing, as it is stated, “He cast into the sea.”

And from where

is it derived that they are judged

by stoning?

The verse states “

he shall surely be stoned,”

a language of pelting with stones, as it is stated, “The men of his city shall stone her with stones, and she shall die.”

And from where is it derived that there is stoning and pushing?

That if he was not killed by one of them—for example, they pushed him and he did not die—they should perform both upon him?

The verse states “

he shall surely be stoned or surely be cast down,”

and from the repetition of the language, since it was not written “for he shall be stoned or cast down,” we include that at times they perform both upon him.

And from where is it derived that if he died through pushing

alone,

he has fulfilled his obligation

and there is no need to stone him further?

The verse states “

or surely be cast down,”

the “or” comes to divide, indicating that both are not always required; rather, at times it is either this or that.

From where is it derived that this is so also for future generations

that for all those liable for stoning they likewise perform pushing, although only stoning is stated concerning them?