Sanhedrin 90a (צ.) — the Talmud in English

The

dispute between the Rabbis and Rabbi Shimon concerning a prophet who incited others, whether his punishment is stoning or strangulation, applies only when he incited them to worship idols.

Two possibilities were stated in this regard:

1.

When he uproots

the entire

substance of the prohibition of idolatry—that is, when he says that he was commanded through the Divine Spirit, from the mouth of the Almighty, to prophesy that the entire prohibition of idolatry in the Torah should be uprooted.

meaning that he says that he was commanded through the holy spirit, from the mouth of the Almighty, to prophesy to uproot the entire prohibition of idolatry from the Torah.

2.

And

when he advocates

observing part and abolishing part of the prohibition of idolatry—that is, when he prophesies that even only part of the prohibition of idolatry should be uprooted.

when he prophesies to uproot even only part of the prohibition of idolatry.

It is specifically with regard to idolatry that the Rabbis hold that his punishment is stoning, because the passage concerning a prophet who incites speaks only of idolatry, as it is stated: “Let us follow other gods, which you have not known, and let us worship them.”

And this verse speaks of a case in which he uproots the entire substance of idolatry.

But as for one who uproots only part of it, we learn

that the Merciful One says at the end of that passage: “To lead you astray from the way that the Lord your God commanded you.”

at the end of that passage: “To lead you away from the path that the Lord your God commanded you.”

And we interpret

“from the way”

—

even part

of the

way: even if he prophesies to abolish only part of the prohibition of idolatry, he is liable to stoning.

But one who uproots the substance of the other mitzvot,

when he prophesies to uproot even one complete mitzva from among the other mitzvot,

everyone agrees that he is liable to strangulation.

This is because the other mitzvot belong to a different passage, concerning a prophet who prophesies what he has not heard. There, the expression “incitement” is not stated, so that we could derive by means of a gzera shava from an inciter, whose punishment is stoning. Rather, it is stated: “And that prophet shall die,” and an unspecified death is strangulation.

And with regard to observing part and abolishing part of the other mitzvot,

when he prophesies to uproot only part of a mitzva among the other mitzvot,

everyone agrees that he is exempt,

even from strangulation.

This is because in the passage concerning one who prophesies what he has not heard, it is stated: “But the prophet who presumptuously speaks a word in My name that I have not commanded him to speak.”

And we interpret “a word” as referring to a complete matter, but not half a matter; for one is not punished with death for abolishing only half of a mitzva.

Rav Hamnuna raises an objection:

It was taught in a beraita: It is stated in the passage concerning a prophet who incites: “To lead you astray from the way that the Lord your God commanded you to walk in.”

And we derive from the superfluous words “to walk in it”:

“To walk”—

this is a positive mitzva,

as “to walk” implies performing an act through affirmative action.

a positive commandment, because “to follow” implies actively carrying something out.

“In it”—

this is a negative mitzva

[which we learn by means of a gzera shava from what is stated concerning a sin-offering, “in which he sinned,” referring to a negative mitzva].

And if it enters your mind

that the entire passage concerning a prophet who incites speaks only

of idolatry,

then where do we find a

positive mitzva with regard to idolatry?

Rather, certainly the passage also speaks of the other mitzvot?

And the Gemara answers:

Rav Ḥisda explained it:

There can be a positive mitzva with regard to idolatry, namely the mitzva stated there:

“And you shall demolish

their altars,” which the false prophet prophesied should be uprooted.

Rav Hamnuna said: The dispute

between the Rabbis and Rabbi Shimon applies

when he uproots

the entire

substance

of the mitzva,

whether with regard to idolatry or with regard to the other mitzvot,

because the passage concerning a prophet who incites also speaks of the other mitzvot, as is demonstrated by the derivation from “to walk,” which refers to a positive mitzva. And Rav Hamnuna did not accept Rav Ḥisda’s answer, that the reference is to the mitzva of “And you shall demolish.”

And

likewise they disagree with regard to

observing part and abolishing part of the prohibition of idolatry,

when he prophesies to uproot only part of the prohibitions of idolatry, because

the Merciful One says:

“From the way”—

even part of the way.

However, this verse still speaks only of idolatry, because “to walk,” from which we derive the other mitzvot, is stated only afterward. And it does not refer to uprooting part of a mitzva; rather, in accordance with the meaning of the verse “to walk in it,” it refers to uprooting the entire mitzva.

But with regard to observing part and abolishing part of the other mitzvot, everyone agrees that he is exempt

entirely.

The Sages taught: One who prophesies to uproot a matter from the Torah is liable.

And if he prophesies

to uphold part and abolish part

of the other mitzvot,

Rabbi Shimon exempts him.

But with regard to idolatry, even

if he seeks to abolish only part, for example, when he

says: “Worship it today

—the idol—

and abolish it tomorrow”,

abolish the idol,

everyone agrees that he is liable.

The amoraim disagreed as to how to interpret this beraita:

Abaye agrees with Rav Ḥisda

concerning the explanation of the dispute between the Rabbis and Rabbi Shimon,

and

therefore

explains it

—the beraita—

in accordance with Rav Ḥisda.

Rava agrees with Rav Hamnuna, and

therefore

explains it in accordance with Rav Hamnuna.

Abaye agrees with Rav Ḥisda and explains it in accordance with Rav Ḥisda:

“One who prophesies to uproot a matter from the Torah”

means that he uproots the entire substance of a mitzva among the other mitzvot, and therefore

everyone agrees that he is liable to strangulation,

even the Rabbis, for the passage concerning a prophet who incites, whose punishment is stoning, speaks only of idolatry, whereas the other mitzvot belong to the passage concerning one who prophesies what he has not heard, whose punishment is strangulation.

“To uphold part and abolish part”

of the other mitzvot,

Rabbi Shimon exempts him

entirely,

and the same is true according to the Rabbis,

because the requirement is for a complete “word,” and not half a word.

“But with regard to idolatry, even if he says, ‘Worship it today and abolish it tomorrow,’ he is liable

to death.”

For which death penalty?

Each according to his position:

According to the Rabbis, he is liable to stoning because of a prophet who incites; and according to Rabbi Shimon, he is liable to strangulation, in accordance with his ruling regarding a prophet who incites.

Rava agrees with Rav Hamnuna and explains it in accordance with Rav Hamnuna:

“One who prophesies to uproot a matter from the Torah”

means that he uproots the entire substance,

whether with regard to idolatry

or

with regard to the other mitzvot; he is liable

to death.

Each according to his position:

According to the Rabbis, he is liable to stoning because of a prophet who incites; and according to Rabbi Shimon, he is liable to strangulation, in accordance with his ruling regarding a prophet who incites.

“To uphold part and abolish part of the other mitzvot, Rabbi Shimon exempts him

entirely,

and the same is true according to the Rabbis,

because “to walk in it” implies that he uproots the entire mitzva.

“But with regard to idolatry, even if he says

to them,

‘Worship it today and abolish it tomorrow,’ he is liable

to death.”

Each according to his position:

According to the Rabbis, he is liable to stoning, and according to Rabbi Shimon, he is liable to strangulation.

Rabbi Abbahu said in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan: With regard to every

matter in the Torah,

if a prophet says to you

—one established as a true prophet—

“Transgress the words of the Torah

because it is necessary for the moment,” such as Elijah the prophet at Mount Carmel, who instructed the people to transgress the prohibition against offering sacrifices outside the Temple,

listen to him!

Except with regard to idolatry, for even if

he

causes the sun to stand in the middle of the firmament

and says to you, “Worship idols,”

do not listen to him!

It was taught: Rabbi Yosei the Galilean says: The Torah fathomed the ultimate nature of idolatry,

namely, that it has the power to alter nature.

Therefore, the Torah granted it dominion,

that is,

even

if you see that the prophet who tells you to worship idols exercises dominion and does as he wishes, for example, when he

causes the sun to stand in the middle of the firmament,

as it is stated: “And he gives you a sign or a wonder,”

do not listen to him!

It was taught: Rabbi Akiva says: Heaven forbid that the Holy One, blessed be He, causes the sun to stand for those who transgress His will,

for it is impossible that a false prophet could cause the sun to stand in the middle of the firmament.

Rather,

what is stated, “And he gives you a sign or a wonder,” refers

for example, to Hananiah ben Azur, who at first

was

a true prophet, but ultimately

became

a false prophet.

Here too, the case is one in which the prophet gave the sign concerning a different prophecy while he was still a true prophet, and afterward, once he became a false prophet, he tells the people to worship idols on the basis of that sign, through which he had been established as a true prophet.

We learned in the Mishna:

And the conspiring witnesses against the daughter of a priest.

And the Gemara asks:

From where are these matters derived

—that conspiring witnesses concerning a priest’s daughter are judged by the death penalty imposed on her paramour, and not by the penalty imposed on her?

Rav Aḥa, son of Rav Ika, said: As it was taught: Rabbi Yosei says: What is the meaning when the verse says

[Deuteronomy 19:19]

“And you shall do to him as he schemed to do to his brother”?

It would have sufficed for the verse to write only “as he schemed”; why does it add “to his brother”?

Rather,

since all

the

conspiring witnesses in the Torah,

their subjects of conspiracy and their paramours are treated alike—that is, since in every other case the paramours are judged by the same death penalty as the woman with whom they had relations, it follows that the conspiring witnesses too should be punished by the same death penalty that they sought to impose upon them.

meaning: since in every case the adulterers are judged by the same death as the woman with whom they had intercourse, then certainly the conspiring witnesses too are punished by the same death that they intended for them.

But in the case of

a priest’s daughter

who committed adultery, the halakha is that only

she is subject to burning, whereas her paramour is not subject to burning,

so with regard to the

conspiring witnesses, I do not know

which death penalty to impose upon them.

If they are compared to him,

they are assigned the death penalty that they sought to impose upon him, namely strangulation.

If they are compared to her,

they are assigned burning, just as they sought to impose upon her.

When the verse says

“to do to his brother,”

we learn:

“To his brother”—

but not to his sister!

Whenever witnesses seek through their testimony to impose liability upon a man and a woman, and the man’s law differs from the woman’s, they are punished by the death penalty applicable to the man, and not by that applicable to the woman.

We have returned to you, chapter “These Are the Ones Subject to Strangulation.”

Introduction

Maimonides wrote And all these matters [concerning the war of Gog and Magog and the messianic era], and the like, no one knows how they will come about until they come about, for these matters are obscure in the words of the prophets. Even the Sages have no received tradition concerning these matters, but only interpretations based on the resolution of the verses. Therefore, they disagree concerning these matters. In any event, neither the precise sequence of the occurrence of these matters nor their details are fundamental to the religion. A person should never occupy himself with the words of the aggadot, nor dwell at length on the midrashim stated concerning these matters and the like, nor make them fundamental, for they do not lead to either fear or love of God. Likewise, he should not calculate the appointed time, as the Sages said [below, in our chapter]: “May the spirit of those who calculate the end expire!” Rather, he should await and believe in the general conception of the matter, as we have explained.”

Nevertheless, since the chapter before us deals, among other things, with many matters that will occur at the end of days, it is appropriate to preface it with a brief presentation of the principal events of the end of days mentioned in our chapter, or related to what is mentioned in our chapter.

They are:

A. The war of Gog and Magog [and the coming of Elijah the prophet].

B. The coming of the Messiah. C. The resurrection of the dead, the destruction of the world, and the World to Come.

A.

The war of Gog and Magog.

Maimonides wrote

Before the war of Gog and Magog, a prophet will arise to restore Israel and prepare their hearts, as it is stated: ‘Behold, I am sending you Elijah, etc.’ And he will come only to bring peace to the world, as it is stated: ‘And he will restore the hearts of fathers to their children.

And some of the Sages say that Elijah will come before the coming of the Messiah.”

It is written in the Book of Ezekiel [chapter 38]: “And it shall come to pass on that day, on the day when Gog comes upon the land of Israel, says the Lord God, that My fury shall rise up in My nostrils; and in My jealousy, in the fire of My wrath, I have spoken: Surely on that day there shall be a great earthquake upon the land of Israel; and the fish of the sea, and the birds of the heavens, and the beasts of the field, etc., shall tremble before Me; and the mountains shall be thrown down, and the steep places shall fall, and every wall shall fall to the ground.”

The essence of this war is that a king named “Gog” will come [and the name of his kingdom is “Magog”], and he will gather all the kingdoms to wage war against Jerusalem.

That army will ultimately succeed in conquering Jerusalem, as it is stated in Zechariah [14:2]: “And I will gather all the nations to battle against Jerusalem, and the city shall be captured, and the houses shall be plundered, etc.”

Afterward, God will wage war against them from the heavens, as it is stated in the Book of Ezekiel [38:22]: “And I will contend with him through pestilence and through blood, and overflowing rain and great hailstones, fire and brimstone I will rain upon him and upon his bands and upon the many peoples who are with him.”

The nations themselves will also kill one another, as it is stated [Ezekiel 38:21]: “Every man’s sword shall be against his brother.”

Maimonides wrote that this war will take place at the beginning of the messianic era. But it is stated in Midrash Rabbah that the war will take place before the coming of the Messiah.

B.

The coming of the Messiah

At first, Messiah son of Joseph will come, and he will be killed during the war of Gog and Magog .

After him, Messiah son of David will come .

The Messiah will restore the Davidic monarchy to its former state. He will build the Temple, gather in the dispersed of Israel, and all the laws will return during his days to their former status, as they were before the destruction of the Temple. That is, they will offer sacrifices, observe the Sabbatical and Jubilee years, and the like.

There are signs demonstrating that a person is the Messiah, as Maimonides wrote [chapter 11 of the Laws of Kings]: “He studies Torah and engages in mitzvot like David his ancestor, etc., and wages the battles of God, etc. But if he did so, succeeded, built the Temple in its place, and gathered in the dispersed of Israel, he is certainly the Messiah.”

It is also stated in our chapter that the Messiah will be “morē’aḥ ve-dan,” able to judge and determine the law on the basis of smell.

C.

The messianic era.

Samuel said

There is no difference between this world and the messianic era except for subjugation to the kingdoms. That is, during the messianic era there will be no change from the conduct of the world according to the laws of nature.

However, the world will return to the state it was in before the sin of Adam. Therefore, although we said that during the messianic era there will be nothing new under the sun, nevertheless we find in the words of the Sages extraordinary things that will occur in those days. For example: “

And the earth shall yield its produce,” not in the manner in which it does so now, but as it did in the days of Adam: on the very day it was sown, it produced fruit.

All the non-fruit-bearing trees in the Land of Israel will be destined to produce fruit.

The Land of Israel will be destined to produce baked bread and fine garments. And other things of this kind.

And in Isaiah’s prophecy it is stated: “And the wolf shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid” .

Some say that in those days Moses and Aaron will arise for resurrection, to instruct the people in the path they should follow, and then they will give terumot to Aaron. And some say that together with them the righteous who longed for the redemption will also arise.

The benefit of those days is that Israel will be free to engage in Torah and its wisdom, so that they may merit life in the World to Come .

In the chapter before us several opinions are cited concerning how long the messianic era will last. Some say forty years, some say seventy years, and there are still further opinions.

C.

The resurrection of the dead,

the destruction of the world in the seventh millennium,

and the World to Come.

We have already brought above the opinion that there will be one resurrection at the beginning of the messianic era, at which Moses, Aaron, and the righteous of Israel will arise.

Afterward, there will be a general resurrection for all Israelites who merit it . The purpose of that resurrection is to reward the body together with the soul, as they were before their deaths, for the good they did in this world . The Ran wrote that the resurrection of the dead will take place after the days of the messianic era have ended. That is, according to the view [cited above] that the messianic era will last forty years, the resurrection of the dead will take place forty years after the coming of the Messiah. And similarly in other cases. The early authorities disagreed concerning the resurrection of the dead: Will that state that will exist at the resurrection, in which the soul is within the body, continue forever , and is this essentially the World to Come?

Or will the soul afterward separate from the body and enter the world of souls, where it will receive its reward? This is the World to Come. Concerning that time the Sages said: “The righteous sit with their crowns upon their heads and delight in the radiance of the Divine Presence” .

In the Gemara later in the chapter it is stated: “Rav Ketina said: The world will exist for six thousand years, and for one thousand it will be desolate, as it is stated: ‘And the Lord alone shall be exalted on that day.’” Plainly, the intention is the period between the messianic era and the World to Come, as will be explained there.

Concerning the meaning of that destruction, there are several approaches:

Some say that the world will be destroyed until it reaches the state that preceded creation: chaos and void. Others say that the intention is not at all the destruction of the world, but that the evil inclination will be destroyed and nullified. Others say that the intention is not a separate millennium following the six thousand years of this world. Rather, one of those millennia—that is, the sixth—will contain many calamities and troubles. We find yet another approach , according to which the world will indeed be destroyed, but this will not occur in the seventh millennium. Rather, it will occur in the fiftieth millennium, which is a Jubilee. Until then, in every seventh millennium one-seventh of the destruction will occur, until in the fiftieth year the world will return to chaos and void, as it was before creation.

Mishna:

All

of

Israel

have

a share

in the World to Come

as it is stated: “And your people are all righteous; they shall inherit the land forever,

the branch of My planting

the work of My hands, in which I glory.” That is, “your people” means all of them, even the sinners, once they have received their punishment and been put to death by the four forms of execution—they are righteous, and will inherit the World to Come .

And these

are

those who have no share in the World to Come

A.

One who says

that

the resurrection of the dead is not מן the Torah [that is, one who says that there is no allusion to the resurrection of the dead in the Torah, although he admits that the resurrection of the dead will in fact occur] .

B.

And

one who says that

the Torah is not from Heaven.

C.

And an epikoros [the Gemara will explain who an epikoros is ].

Rabbi Akiva says: Even one who reads external books [the Gemara will explain which books are “external”] has no share in the World to Come.

And

likewise

one who whispers over a wound and says: “Of all the sickness that I placed upon Egypt, I shall not place upon you, for I am the Lord your healer,”

has no share in the World to Come .

Abba Shaul says: Even one who articulates

the

Name of God by its letters.

It is forbidden to pronounce the Name as it is written; rather, it must be pronounced as Adonai .

Three kings

who ruled over Israel,

and

likewise

four commoners

who were in Israel—

they have no share in the World to Come.

And these are those

three kings:

Jeroboam,

Ahab,

and Manasseh.

Rabbi Judah

disagrees with the first tanna and

says: Manasseh—

he has a share in the World to Come. As it is stated: “And he prayed to Him, and He was entreated by him, and He brought him back to Jerusalem to his kingdom,

and Manasseh knew that the Lord is God.”

They said to him: “To his kingdom”

indeed

He restored him

the Holy One, blessed be He, with the meaning that the verse states: “And He brought him back to Jerusalem to his kingdom.” But—

He did not restore him to life in the World to Come.

And these are

four

of the

commoners

who have no share in the World to Come:

Balaam,

Doeg,

Ahithophel,

and Gehazi.

The Gemara will explain from where we know that those kings and commoners have no share in the World to Come.

Gemara:

And we raise a question concerning this:

And why so much?

That is, what is so severe about saying that the resurrection of the dead is not מן the Torah that his punishment is that he will not live in the future?

And we say:

A tanna

taught as follows in a beraita:

He denied the resurrection of the dead; therefore, he will have no share in the resurrection of the dead,

and he will not enter into life in the World to Come.

For all the attributes of the Holy One, blessed be He,

are measure for measure

.

For Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said in the name of Rabbi Yonatan: From where is it derived that all the attributes of the Holy One, blessed be He, are measure for measure

?

As it is stated

when the king of Aram besieged Samaria, and there was a great famine in the land

: “And Elisha said: Hear the word of the Lord, etc.: At this time tomorrow, a se’a of fine flour shall sell for a shekel, and two se’ahs of barley for a shekel, at the gate of Samaria.”

That is, whereas until then there had been great scarcity in the land, to the extent that a donkey’s head was sold for eighty silver coins, there would be great abundance, and a se’a of fine flour would be sold for a shekel.

And it is written: “And the officer upon whose hand the king leaned answered the man of God and said

that is, the officer upon whose hand the king leaned

and said: Behold, the Lord will make windows in heaven; could this thing be?!”

That is, the officer said mockingly to the prophet: Even if the Lord were to make windows in heaven and lower wheat and barley through them onto the earth, could such a thing possibly happen?!

And the prophet answered him

: “Behold, you shall see it with your own eyes

but from there you shall not eat.”

That is, you will see that this cheapness will indeed come about, but you will not eat from there, because you will die immediately.