Mishnah.org Logo

Today's Mishnah Yomi

Sanhedrin 9:2 - 9:3

The Mishnah Yomi for Wednesday, January 15, 2025 is Sanhedrin 9:2 - 9:3

＜ Previous DayTodayNext Day ＞

Mishnah 1

Mishnayos Sanhedrin Perek 9 Mishnah 2

סנהדרין פרק ט׳ משנה ב׳

2
If one intended to kill an animal, and he killed a person standing adjacent to it, or if he intended to kill a gentile, for whose murder he is not liable to be executed in court, and he killed a Jew, or if he intended to kill non-viable newborns, for whose murder one is not liable, and he killed a viable person, the assailant is exempt from execution, since his intent was to kill one for whose murder he is not liable. If one intended to strike another on his loins, and the blow was not powerful enough to kill him if it were to land on his loins, but instead the blow landed on his chest over the victim’s heart, and it was powerful enough to kill him when it landed on his chest over his heart, and the victim died as a result of the blow, the assailant is exempt from execution, as he did not intend to strike the victim a blow that would cause his death. If he intended to strike him on his chest over his heart and the blow was powerful enough to kill him were it to land on his chest over his heart, and instead the blow landed on his loins, and it was not powerful enough to kill him when it landed on his loins, and nevertheless the victim died, the assailant is exempt. Although the assailant intended to kill the victim, the blow was not powerful enough to kill. Ostensibly, his death was not a result of the blow. If one intended to kill an adult and the blow was not powerful enough to kill the adult, and instead the blow landed on a minor, and the blow was powerful enough to kill the minor and the minor died, the assailant is exempt. If one intended to kill a minor and the blow was powerful enough to kill a minor, and the blow landed on an adult and the blow was not powerful enough to kill the adult, and nevertheless, the adult died, the assailant is exempt. But if one intended to strike another on his loins, and the blow was powerful enough to kill him were it to land on his loins, and instead the blow landed on his chest over his heart, and he died, the assailant is liable, since in any event, his intent was to kill the victim and the blow was powerful enough to kill him wherever it struck him. If one intended to strike an adult and the blow was powerful enough to kill the adult, and the blow landed on a minor and he died, the assailant is liable. Rabbi Shimon says: Even if one intended to kill this one and he killed that one, although he would be liable for killing either, he is exempt, because one is executed only if his action completely corresponded with his intent.
נִתְכַּוֵּן לַהֲרֹג אֶת הַבְּהֵמָה וְהָרַג אֶת הָאָדָם, לַנָּכְרִי וְהָרַג אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל, לִנְפָלִים, וְהָרַג בֶּן קְיָמָא, פָּטוּר. נִתְכַּוֵּן לְהַכּוֹתוֹ עַל מָתְנָיו וְלֹא הָיָה בָהּ כְּדֵי לְהָמִית עַל מָתְנָיו וְהָלְכָה לָהּ עַל לִבּוֹ וְהָיָה בָהּ כְּדֵי לְהָמִית עַל לִבּוֹ, וָמֵת, פָּטוּר. נִתְכַּוֵּן לְהַכּוֹתוֹ עַל לִבּוֹ וְהָיָה בָהּ כְּדֵי לְהָמִית עַל לִבּוֹ וְהָלְכָה לָהּ עַל מָתְנָיו וְלֹא הָיָה בָהּ כְּדֵי לְהָמִית עַל מָתְנָיו, וָמֵת, פָּטוּר. נִתְכַּוֵּן לְהַכּוֹת אֶת הַגָּדוֹל וְלֹא הָיָה בָהּ כְּדֵי לְהָמִית הַגָּדוֹל וְהָלְכָה לָהּ עַל הַקָּטָן וְהָיָה בָהּ כְּדֵי לְהָמִית אֶת הַקָּטָן, וָמֵת, פָּטוּר. נִתְכַּוֵּן לְהַכּוֹת אֶת הַקָּטָן וְהָיָה בָהּ כְּדֵי לְהָמִית אֶת הַקָּטָן וְהָלְכָה לָהּ עַל הַגָּדוֹל וְלֹא הָיָה בָהּ כְּדֵי לְהָמִית אֶת הַגָּדוֹל, וָמֵת, פָּטוּר. אֲבָל נִתְכַּוֵּן לְהַכּוֹת עַל מָתְנָיו וְהָיָה בָהּ כְּדֵי לְהָמִית עַל מָתְנָיו וְהָלְכָה לָהּ עַל לִבּוֹ, וָמֵת, חַיָּב. נִתְכַּוֵּן לְהַכּוֹת אֶת הַגָּדוֹל וְהָיָה בָהּ כְּדֵי לְהָמִית אֶת הַגָּדוֹל וְהָלְכָה לָהּ עַל הַקָּטָן, וָמֵת, חַיָּב. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, אֲפִלּוּ נִתְכַּוֵּן לַהֲרֹג אֶת זֶה וְהָרַג אֶת זֶה, פָּטוּר:
ב׳

והיה בה כדי להמית על לבו ומת פטור – That both are necessary, that he intends to wound [to cause] death and also that they should stripe him a wound [to cause] death.

ר"ש אומר אפילו נתכוין להרוג את זה. – this does not refer to the end of the matter of the first Tanna, on that which the first Tanna [mentioned]– that he had the intention to wound the large individual but if it struck the small individual and he died, he is liable. For it is upon this that it refers, Rabbi Shimon exempts this person, is needed to be said, and why should he retract and explain that even if he intended to kill this one and killed that one, as the first Tanna explicitly stated this, what is the purpose of the word “even?” But, Rabbi Shimon is referring to the beginning – that if he intended to kill the animal and [instead] killed a person, he is exempt; but if he intended to kill a [particular] person but [instead] killed another person, he is liable. And on this, Rabbi Shimon comments – even if he intended to kill this one and killed [instead] that one, he is exempt. And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Shimon.

והיה בה כדי להמית על לבו ומת פטור. דתרתי בעינן, שיהא מתכוין למכת מיתה וגם שיכנו מכת מיתה:

ר״ש אומר אפילו נתכוין להרוג את זה. לאו אסיפא דמלתא דתנא קמא קאי, אהא דקאמר תנא קמא נתכוין להכות את הגדול והיה בה כדי להמית את הגדול והלכה על הקטן ומת חייב, דאי אהא קאי, רבי שמעון פוטר מיבעי ליה, ולמה ליה למהדר ולפרושי אפילו נתכוין להרוג את זה והרג את זה, הא בפירוש אמרו ת״ק, ומאי אפילו. אלא ר״ש ארישא קאי, נתכוין להרוג את הבהמה והרג את האדם פטור, הא נתכוין להרוג את האדם והרג אדם אחר חייב, ועלה קאמר ר״ש אפילו נתכוין להרוג את זה והרג את זה פטור. והלכה כרבי שמעון:

Mishnah 2

Mishnayos Sanhedrin Perek 9 Mishnah 3

סנהדרין פרק ט׳ משנה ג׳

3
With regard to a murderer who was intermingled with others and it is not possible to identify the murderer, all of them are exempt from liability to be executed. Rabbi Yehuda says: The court gathers them into the vaulted chamber [lakippa] where they will eventually die. With regard to all those liable to be executed with different court-imposed death penalties who became intermingled with each other and it cannot be determined which individual was sentenced to which death, they are all sentenced to the most lenient form of execution to which any of them was sentenced. In a case where those who are liable to be stoned were intermingled with those who are liable to be burned, Rabbi Shimon says: They are all sentenced to be executed by stoning, as burning is a more severe form of execution than stoning. And the Rabbis say: They are all sentenced to be executed by burning, as stoning is a more severe form of execution than burning. Rabbi Shimon said to the Rabbis: If burning were not more severe than stoning, it would not have been administered to a priest’s daughter who committed adultery. A betrothed daughter of an Israelite who committed adultery is executed by stoning. If burning were not a more severe form of execution than stoning, it would not have been administered to the daughter of a priest who committed adultery, who would presumably receive a more severe punishment. The Rabbis said to Rabbi Shimon: If stoning were not more severe than burning it would not have been the death penalty administered to a blasphemer and to an idol worshipper, as their actions violate the very core of the Jewish faith. There is a parallel dispute: In a case where those who are liable to be killed by beheading were intermingled with those who are liable to be strangled, Rabbi Shimon says: They are all sentenced to be beheaded with a sword, as strangulation is a more severe form of execution than beheading. And the Rabbis say: They are all sentenced to be executed by strangulation, as beheading is a more severe form of execution than strangulation.
רוֹצֵחַ שֶׁנִּתְעָרֵב בַּאֲחֵרִים, כֻּלָּן פְּטוּרִין. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, כּוֹנְסִין אוֹתָן לְכִפָּה. כָּל חַיָּבֵי מִיתוֹת שֶׁנִּתְעָרְבוּ זֶה בָזֶה, נִדּוֹנִין בַּקַּלָּה. הַנִּסְקָלִין בַּנִּשְׂרָפִין, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, נִדּוֹנִין בִּסְקִילָה, שֶׁהַשְּׂרֵפָה חֲמוּרָה. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, נִדּוֹנִין בִּשְׂרֵפָה, שֶׁהַסְּקִילָה חֲמוּרָה. אָמַר לָהֶן רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, אִלּוּ לֹא הָיְתָה שְׂרֵפָה חֲמוּרָה, לֹא נִתְּנָה לְבַת כֹּהֵן שֶׁזִּנְּתָה. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, אִלּוּ לֹא הָיְתָה סְקִילָה חֲמוּרָה, לֹא נִתְּנָה לַמְגַדֵּף וְלָעוֹבֵד עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה. הַנֶּהֱרָגִין בַּנֶּחֱנָקִין, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, בְּסַיִף. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, בְּחֶנֶק:
ג׳

רוצח שנתערב באחרים – such as two people who were standing and an arrow came out from between them and killed, both of them are exempt, and even if one of the two of them was presumed for his righteousness and it was known that he did not shoot the arrow, even so, they don’t make him liabler for other by this presumption.

רבי יהודה אומר כונסין אותן לכיפה – Our Mishnah is deficient and this is how it should be read as follows: An ox whose proceedings are finished (i.e., the sentence was pronounced) that it was mixed up with other oxen , they stone them, for perforce, all of them forbidden to derive benefit from them and even if they were one-thousand, because of this ox that was mixed up with others, therefore we stone all of them in order that the Mitzvah of stoning can be fulfilled with the one who was liable for it. [Rabbi Yehuda states]: They put them all in prison., and there is no need to stone them, but rather, put them in a room and they will die of hunger. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehuda.

ר' שמעון אומר בסייף – for choking is more stringent.

וחכמים אומרים בחנק – for the sword is more stringent.

רוצח שנתערב באחרים. כגון שנים שהיו עומדים ויצא חץ מביניהם והרג, שניהם פטורים. ואפילו אחד משניהם מוחזק בחסידות ובידוע שהוא לא זרק החץ, אפילו הכי לא מחייבין ליה לאידך בחזקה זו:

רבי יהודה אומר כונסין אותן לכיפה. מתניתין חסורי מחסרא והכי קתני, ושור שנגמר דינו שנתערב בשוורים אחרים, סוקלים אותם, דהא על כרחך כולהו אסורים בהנאה ואפילו הן אלף, מפני זה המעורב בהן, הלכך סוקלין את כולם כדי שתתקיים מצות סקילה במחוייב בה. [ר׳ יהודה אומר] כונסין אותן לכיפה. ואין צריך לסקלן, אלא כונסין אותן לחדר והן מתים ברעב. ואין הלכה כר׳ יהודה:

ר׳ שמעון אומר בסייף. שהחנק חמור:

וחכמים אומרים בחנק. שהסייף חמור:

Mishnah Yomi FAQ

Still have a question? Contact Us