Mishnah.org Logo

Today's Mishnah Yomi

Sanhedrin 11:6 - Makkos 1:1

The Mishnah Yomi for Thursday, January 23, 2025 is Sanhedrin 11:6 - Makkos 1:1

＜ Previous DayTodayNext Day ＞

Mishnah 1

Mishnayos Sanhedrin Perek 11 Mishnah 6

סנהדרין פרק י"א משנה ו׳

6
One who prophesies in the name of idol worship and says: This is what the idol said, even if he approximated the correct halakha in the name of the idol to deem ritually impure that which is ritually impure and to deem ritually pure that which is ritually pure, is executed by strangulation. In the case of one who engages in intercourse with a married woman once she entered her husband’s domain for the purposes of marriage, even if the marriage was not yet consummated, as she did not yet engage in intercourse with him, one who engages in intercourse with her is executed by strangulation. Before marriage, one who engages in intercourse with her is liable to be executed by stoning. And conspiring witnesses who testified that the daughter of a priest committed adultery are executed by strangulation, even though were she guilty, she would be executed by burning. And her paramour is also executed by strangulation, as in any case where one engages in intercourse with a married woman. As all those who are rendered conspiring witnesses are led to their deaths via the same mode of execution with which they conspired to have their victim executed, except for conspiring witnesses who testified that the daughter of a priest and her paramour committed adultery. In that case, although the priest’s daughter who commits adultery is executed by burning, the conspiring witnesses who sought to have her executed are executed by strangulation, as is the paramour whom they also conspired to have executed.
הַמִּתְנַבֵּא בְשֵׁם עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה וְאוֹמֵר, כָּךְ אָמְרָה עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, אֲפִלּוּ כִוֵּן אֶת הַהֲלָכָה, לְטַמֵּא אֶת הַטָּמֵא וּלְטַהֵר אֶת הַטָּהוֹר. הַבָּא עַל אֵשֶׁת אִישׁ, כֵּיוָן שֶׁנִּכְנְסָה לִרְשׁוּת הַבַּעַל לַנִּשּׂוּאִין אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא נִבְעֲלָה, הַבָּא עָלֶיהָ הֲרֵי זֶה בְחֶנֶק. וְזוֹמְמֵי בַת כֹּהֵן וּבוֹעֲלָהּ, שֶׁכָּל הַזּוֹמְמִין מַקְדִּימִין לְאוֹתָהּ מִיתָה, חוּץ מִזּוֹמְמֵי בַת כֹּהֵן וּבוֹעֲלָהּ:
ו׳

לרשות הבעל – such as the father who handed her over to the agents of the husband and still is still on the way, furthermore, we don’t call refer to her as “the house of her father.”

לאותה מיתה – that they make the judged liable for.

ובועלה – that is to say, all of those who those [men] who have sexual intercourse are judged like the death of the one (i.e., the woman) who had sexual intercourse, except for the case of a person who has sexual intercourse with the daughter of a Kohen – as she is [punished] by burning [by drinking a molten-liquid] and he [is punished] by strangulation.

לרשות הבעל. כגון שמסר האב לשלוחי הבעל ועדיין היא בדרך, תו לא קרינא בה בית אביה:

לאותה מיתה. שהיו מחייבין את הנידון:

ובועלה. כלומר, וכל הבועלים נידונים כמיתת הנבעלת, חוץ מבועל בת כהן שהיא בשריפה והוא בחנק:

Mishnah 2

Mishnayos Makkos Perek 1 Mishnah 1

מכות פרק א׳ משנה א׳

1
How are witnesses rendered conspiring witnesses? This applies in a case where two witnesses came before the court and said: We testify with regard to so-and-so, who is a priest, that he is the son of a divorced woman or the son of a ḥalutza, a yevama who performed the rite of ḥalitza to free herself from the levirate bond. Those testimonies render him a ḥalal (see Leviticus 21:6–7), one disqualified from the priesthood due to flawed lineage. If a second set of witnesses testifies in court and renders the first set conspiring witnesses, one does not say with regard to each of the conspiring witnesses: This witness shall be rendered the son of a divorced woman or the son of a ḥalutza in his stead. Rather, he receives forty lashes as punishment for his false testimony. Likewise, in a case where two witnesses came before the court and said: We testify with regard to so-and-so that he is liable to be exiled to a city of refuge for unwittingly killing another (see Numbers 35:11), and a second set of witnesses testifies in court and renders the first set conspiring witnesses, one does not say with regard to each of the conspiring witnesses: This witness shall be exiled in his stead. Rather, he receives forty lashes. In the case of witnesses who said: We testify with regard to a man called so-and-so that he divorced his wife and did not give her payment of her marriage contract, and they were then rendered conspiring witnesses, the question arises with regard to the manner in which the sum of their payment is calculated. It is not possible to render the witnesses liable to pay the entire sum of the marriage contract, as they can claim: But isn’t it so that either today or tomorrow, i.e., at some point in the future, he may divorce his wife or die and ultimately he will be liable to give her payment of her marriage contract? That being the case, the witnesses did not conspire to render him liable to pay a sum that he would otherwise not be liable to pay. The sum of their payment is calculated as follows: The court assesses how much money another person would be willing to give in order to purchase the rights to this woman’s marriage contract, cognizant of the uncertainty that if she was widowed or divorced the purchaser will receive payment of the marriage contract but if she dies, her husband will inherit from her, and the one who purchased her marriage contract will receive nothing. In the case of witnesses who said: We testify with regard to a man called so-and-so that he owes another person one thousand dinars that he borrowed on the condition that he is to give the money back to him from now until thirty days have passed, and the borrower says that he borrowed that sum but it was on the condition that he is to give the money back to him from now until ten years have passed, and they were rendered conspiring witnesses, here too, it is not possible to render the witnesses liable to pay the entire sum. Rather, the court estimates how much money a person would be willing to give so that he would keep a loan of one thousand dinars in his possession, and one calculates the difference between that sum in a situation where he would be required to give the money back from now until thirty days have passed, and that same sum in a situation where he would be required to give the money back from now until ten years have passed. That difference is the sum that the testimony of the conspiring witnesses sought to have the borrower lose; therefore, it is the sum that they must pay.
כֵּיצַד הָעֵדִים נַעֲשִׂים זוֹמְמִין, מְעִידִין אָנוּ בְאִישׁ פְּלוֹנִי שֶׁהוּא בֶן גְּרוּשָׁה אוֹ בֶן חֲלוּצָה, אֵין אוֹמְרִים יֵעָשֶׂה זֶה בֶן גְּרוּשָׁה אוֹ בֶן חֲלוּצָה תַחְתָּיו, אֶלָּא לוֹקֶה אַרְבָּעִים. מְעִידִין אָנוּ בְאִישׁ פְּלוֹנִי שֶׁהוּא חַיָּב לִגְלוֹת, אֵין אוֹמְרִים יִגְלֶה זֶה תַחְתָּיו, אֶלָּא לוֹקֶה אַרְבָּעִים. מְעִידִין אָנוּ בְאִישׁ פְּלוֹנִי שֶׁגֵּרַשׁ אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ וְלֹא נָתַן לָהּ כְּתֻבָּתָהּ, וַהֲלֹא בֵּין הַיּוֹם וּבֵין לְמָחָר סוֹפוֹ לִתֵּן לָהּ כְּתֻבָּתָהּ, אוֹמְדִין כַּמָּה אָדָם רוֹצֶה לִתֵּן בִּכְתֻבָּתָהּ שֶׁל זוֹ, שֶׁאִם נִתְאַלְמְנָה אוֹ נִתְגָּרְשָׁה, וְאִם מֵתָה יִירָשֶׁנָּה בַעְלָהּ. מְעִידִין אָנוּ בְאִישׁ פְּלוֹנִי שֶׁהוּא חַיָּב לַחֲבֵרוֹ אֶלֶף זוּז עַל מְנָת לִתְּנָן לוֹ מִכָּאן וְעַד שְׁלשִׁים יוֹם, וְהוּא אוֹמֵר מִכָּאן וְעַד עֶשֶׂר שָׁנִים, אוֹמְדִין כַּמָּה אָדָם רוֹצֶה לִתֵּן וְיִהְיוּ בְיָדוֹ אֶלֶף זוּז, בֵּין נוֹתְנָן מִכָּאן וְעַד שְׁלשִׁים יוֹם, בֵּין נוֹתְנָן מִכָּאן וְעַד עֶשֶׂר שָׁנִים:
א׳

When do witnesses become zomemin. This is what it means to say, those witnesses that were found zomemin and we don't do to them the law of hazama, meaning that we don't fulfill in them "And do to them as they planned to do to their brother", how are they made zomemin.

We testify about this man so-and-so. Kohen.

That he is the son of a divorced woman. In front of us his mother was divorced before she gave birth and behold he is unfit for the Temple service.

We don't say. If they were made zomemin and they are Kohanim we make them into the son of a divorced woman to fulfill "like they planned", as it is written (Deuteronomy 19:19) "Do to them as they planned", to them and not their children. If we made them unfit for the Temple service, and they are Kohanim, we make their children unfit forever. If you'll say let us invalidate them alone and not their children, we need to fulfill "as they planned", and this wouldn't be doing that, since they planned to invalidate the accused and his children.

Rather they are lashed 40 times. As the verse states (Deuteronomy 25:1-2) "They vindicated the righteous one and convicted the wicked one then it will be if the wicked one deserves to be beaten", [Just] because they convicted the wicked one it will be that he deserves to be beaten? Rather, [it is referring to] witnesses that made wicked a righteous one and came another set of witnesses and they vindicated the original righteous one and changed these [first witnesses] into wicked ones, if that will be then beat the wicked one [with lashes].

We don't say this one goes to exile. Since it is written regarding a murderer (Deuteronomy 19:5) "He shall flee", he [the murdeer] and not zommemin.

That he divorced his wife. in front of us such and such a day, and this one [the accused] says "I did not divorce her and I am not obligated to pay her ketubah.

Is it not that either today or tomorrow. Meaning what do they [the zomemin] pay to him [the accused]? If you say the entire ketubah, perhaps he will die or perhaps he will divorce her today or tomorrow and in the end pay her anyways, and then it comes out that they weren't making him lose anything.

We assess how much a person would be willing to pay for this one's ketubah. due to an uncertainty. Since if she is widowed or divorced the one who purchased the ketubah will take [the whole value], and if she dies her husband inherits her and [the purchaser] loses the money he gave [for the ketubah], and this is what the [zomemin] witnesses stipulate to the husband.

כיצד העדים נעשים זוממין. הכי קאמר, אותן עדים שנמצאו זוממין ואין עושין בהן דין הזמה, כלומר שאין מקיימין בהם ועשיתם לו כאשר זמם לעשות לאחיו, כיצד הן נעשים זוממים:

מעידין אנו באיש פלוני. כהן:

שהוא בן גרושה. בפנינו נתגרשה אמו קודם שנולד והרי הוא חלל:

אין אומרים. אם הוזמו והם כהנים יעשה זה בן גרושה לקיים בו כאשר זמם, דהא כתיב (דברים י״ט) ועשיתם לו כאשר זמם, לו ולא לזרעו. ואם תעשהו חלל והוא כהן, פסלת את זרעו לעולם. ואם תאמר נפסול אותו לבדו ולא זרעו, בעינן כאשר זמם לעשות וליכא, שהרי הוא זמם לפסול הנידון ואת זרעו:

אלא לוקה ארבעים. דאמר קרא (שם כ״ה) והצדיקו את הצדיק והרשיעו את הרשע והיה אם בן הכות הרשע, משום דהרשיעו את הרשע, והיה אם בן הכות הרשע, אלא, עדים שהרשיעו את הצדיק ואתו עדי אחריני והצדיקו את הצדיק דמעיקרא ושוינהו להנך רשעים, והיה אם בן הכות הרשע:

אין אומרים יגלה זה. דכתיב ברוצח (שם י״ט) הוא ינוס, הוא ולא זוממיו:

שגירש את אשתו. בפנינו ביום פלוני, וזה אומר לא גרשתי ואיני חייב לה כתובה:

והלא בין היום ובין למחר. כלומר מה ישלמו לו, אם תאמר כל הכתובה, והלא שמא ימות או שמא יגרשנה היום או למחר וסופו ליתן לה, נמצא שלא היו מפסידין אותו כלום:

אומדין כמה אדם רוצה ליתן בכתובתה של זו. מספק. שאם נתאלמנה או נתגרשה יטלנה לוקח, ואם מתה יירשנה בעלה ויפסיד מעותיו שנתן, וכך יתנו העדים לבעל:

Mishnah Yomi FAQ

Still have a question? Contact Us