Sanhedrin 42aסנהדרין מ״ב א
The William Davidson Talmudתלמוד מהדורת ויליאם דוידסון
Toggle Reader Menu Display Settings
42aמ״ב א

ותרוייהו כר' יוחנן סבירא להו הא למיהוי כי יתרא הא למיהוי כי נפיא

The Gemara comments: And they both hold in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan that one can recite the blessing until the flaw of the moon is filled. The dispute is that this one, i.e., Rav Ya’akov bar Idi, who holds one can recite the blessing until seven days have passed, understands Rabbi Yoḥanan to be referring to the day when the moon will be like the string of a bow. Before that point the moon appeared merely as a bow, and after seven days it appears like a half-circle, like a bow that has a string. That one, i.e., the Sages of Neharde’a, who holds one can recite the blessing until sixteen days have passed, understands Rabbi Yoḥanan to be referring to the day when the moon will be like a sieve, i.e., a full circle.

אמר ליה רב אחא מדיפתי לרבינא וליבריך הטוב והמטיב אמר ליה אטו כי חסר מי מברכינן דיין האמת דלבריך הטוב והמטיב וליברכינהו לתרוייהו כיון דהיינו אורחיה לא מברכינן

§ Rav Aḥa of Difti said to Ravina: And they should bless the blessing of: Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the Universe, Who is good and Who does good, for the benefit that people derive from the light of moon. Ravina said to him: Is that to say that when the moon is shrinking we bless, as we do for other disasters: Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the Universe, the true Judge, so that we should conversely bless: Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the Universe, Who is good and Who does good, when the moon is growing? Rav Aḥa of Difti said to him: You are correct, and we should say them both: The blessing of the true Judge, when the moon is waning, and the blessing of Who is good and Who does good, when the moon is waxing. Ravina answered him: Since this is its nature, we do not bless the moon. The waxing and waning of the moon is not an unexpected occurrence that requires these blessings.

וא"ר אחא בר חנינא א"ר אסי א"ר יוחנן כל המברך על החדש בזמנו כאילו מקבל פני שכינה כתיב הכא (שמות יב, ב) החדש הזה וכתיב התם (שמות טו, ב) זה אלי ואנוהו תנא דבי רבי ישמעאל אילמלא (לא) זכו ישראל אלא להקביל פני אביהן שבשמים כל חדש וחדש דיים אמר אביי הלכך נימרינהו מעומד

And Rabbi Aḥa bar Ḥanina says that Rabbi Asi says that Rabbi Yoḥanan says: With regard to anyone who blesses the new month in its proper time, it is as if he greets the Face of the Divine Presence. Alluding to this, it is written here concerning the sanctification of the new month: “This month shall be for you the beginning of months” (Exodus 12:2), and it is written there, where the Jewish people encountered the Divine Presence at the splitting of the sea: “This is my God and I will glorify Him” (Exodus 15:2). The term “this” is employed in both verses. The school of Rabbi Yishmael taught: If the Jewish people merited to greet the Face of their Father in Heaven only one time each and every month, it would suffice for them, since in the blessing of the moon there is an aspect of greeting the Divine Presence. Abaye said: Therefore, we will say the blessing while standing, in honor of the Divine Presence.

מרימר ומר זוטרא מכתפי (אהדדי) ומברכי א"ל רב אחא לרב אשי במערבא מברכי ברוך מחדש חדשים אמר ליה האי נשי דידן נמי מברכי

The Gemara relates: Mareimar and Mar Zutra would lean on one another’s shoulders and recite the blessing. Rav Aḥa said to Rav Ashi: In the West, Eretz Yisrael, they recite the following blessing on the moon: Blessed is He Who renews the months. Rav Ashi said to him: Our women also recite that blessing, meaning that this is an abridged version for the unlettered.

אלא כדרב יהודה דאמר רב יהודה ברוך [וכו'] אשר במאמרו ברא שחקים וברוח פיו כל צבאם חוק וזמן נתן להם שלא ישנו את תפקידם ששים ושמחים לעשות רצון קונם פועלי אמת שפעולתן אמת וללבנה אמר שתתחדש עטרת תפארת לעמוסי בטן שהן עתידין להתחדש כמותה ולפאר ליוצרם על שם כבוד מלכותו ברוך אתה ה' מחדש חדשים

Rather, the full version of the blessing is the version of Rav Yehuda. As Rav Yehuda says: Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the Universe, Who by His word created the heavens, and by the breath of his mouth all their hosts. He set for them a law and a time, that they should not deviate from their task. And they are joyous and glad to perform the will of their Owner; they are workers of truth whose work is truth. And to the moon He said that it should renew itself as a crown of beauty for those He carried from the womb, as they are destined to be renewed like it, and to praise their Creator for the name of His glorious kingdom. Blessed are You the Lord, Who renews the months.

(משלי כד, ו) כי בתחבולות תעשה לך מלחמה א"ר אחא בר חנינא א"ר אסי א"ר יוחנן במי אתה מוצא מלחמתה של תורה במי שיש בידו חבילות של משנה קרי רב יוסף אנפשיה (משלי יד, ד) ורב תבואות בכח שור:

The Gemara presents another statement, citing Rabbi Aḥa, citing Rabbi Asi, citing Rabbi Yoḥanan. The verse states: “For by wise advice you shall make your war” (Proverbs 24:6). Rabbi Aḥa bar Ḥanina says that Rabbi Asi says that Rabbi Yoḥanan says: In whom do you find the war, i.e., the ability to engage in disputes, of Torah? In one who has in his possession bundles, i.e., vast knowledge, of Mishna. One must first learn the primary sources before engaging in disputes of Torah. Rav Yosef would read concerning himself the verse: “And much produce comes by the strength of the ox” (Proverbs 14:4), i.e., one with great strength can bring a large yield. Rav Yosef was known to be particularly well-versed in tannaitic statements.

אחד אומר בשתי שעות כו': א"ר שימי בר אשי לא שנו אלא שעות אבל אחד אומר קודם הנץ החמה ואחד אומר לאחר הנץ החמה עדותן בטילה

§ The mishna teaches that if one witness says that the event occurred at two hours, i.e., the second hour of the day from sunrise, and one witness says that the event occurred at three hours, their testimony stands. Rav Shimi bar Ashi says: This was taught only when there was a difference in the hours, but if one witness says that the event occurred before the sunrise, and one says that the event occurred after the sunrise, their testimony is void. Although this may be a smaller discrepancy in terms of time, the difference between before and after sunrise cannot be ascribed to an error.

פשיטא אלא אחד אומר קודם הנץ ואחד אומר בתוך הנץ הא נמי פשיטא מהו דתימא הא בגילויא קאי וזהרורי בעלמא הוא דחזא קמ"ל:

The Gemara asks: Isn’t this obvious? There is a clear difference between darkness and light. Rather, Rav Shimi bar Ashi said as follows: If one witness says that the event occurred before the sunrise, and one says that the event occurred during the sunrise, their testimony is void. The Gemara asks: Isn’t this also obvious? The Gemara answers: Lest you say that this one who says: During the sunrise, was standing in an exposed place and saw a mere shine and thought he saw the sunrise, Rav Shimi bar Ashi teaches us the court does not assume this occurred, and deems the testimony incongruent.

ואחר כך מכניסין כו': אותו היום ותו לא והתניא אם יש ממש בדבריו לא היה יורד משם לעולם ואם אין ממש בדבריו אין יורד כל היום כולו כדי שלא תהא עלייתו ירידה לו אמר אביי תרגומה אאם אין ממש בדבריו:

§ The mishna teaches: And afterward they bring in the second witness and examine him. Later, the mishna states: But if one of the students said: I can teach a reason to acquit him, they raise him to the seat of the court and seat him among them, and he would not descend from there all day. The Gemara asks: That day and no more? But isn’t it taught in a baraita (Tosefta 9:3): If the statement of that student has substance he would never descend from there, as his statement demonstrates that he is capable of deliberating with the other judges. But if the statement of that student does not have substance, he would not descend from there the entire day, in order that his ascent should not be a descent for him, i.e., to avoid humiliating him. Abaye said: Interpret the mishna to be with regard to a case when the statement of that student does not have substance.

מצאו לו זכות כו': יין מאי טעמא לא אמר רבי אחא בר חנינא אמר קרא (משלי לא, ד) ולרוזנים אי שכר העוסקין ברזו של עולם אל ישתכרו:

The mishna teaches that if the court found it fit to acquit the defendant during the deliberations, as all or a majority of them agree to acquit him, they excuse him. The mishna further teaches that the judges would not drink wine all day. The Gemara asks: What is the reason they did not drink wine? Rabbi Aḥa bar Ḥanina says that it is because the verse states: “It is not for kings to drink wine, nor for princes [rozenim] to say: Where is strong drink” (Proverbs 31:4). Rabbi Aḥa bar Ḥanina explains: This is a directive to those who deal with the secret of the world [berazo shel olam], i.e., such stringent matters: Do not become drunk.

(מצאו לו זכות כו'): לא ראו מאי

§ The mishna teaches: If the court found it fit to acquit him during the deliberations, as all or a majority of them agree to acquit him, they release him. It was further taught in the mishna that when the court cannot arrive at a verdict they add judges in pairs of two and deliberate until there is a clear verdict. If they added the maximum number of judges and still cannot reach a clear verdict, they discuss the matter until one of those who deems him liable sees the validity of the statements of those who acquit, and changes his position. The Gemara asks: If the judges do not change their position, as they do not see the validity of the position of those who acquit him, what is done?

א"ר אחא פוטרין אותו וכן א"ר יוחנן פוטרין אותו א"ל רב פפא לאביי וליפטריה מעיקרא א"ל הכי א"ר יוחנן כדי שלא יצאו מב"ד מעורבבין

Rabbi Aḥa says: They release him, as he was not found liable. And likewise Rabbi Yoḥanan says: They release him. Rav Pappa said to Abaye: But if they ultimately release him if the court is deadlocked, why do they attempt to convince each other at all when they should release him from the outset? Abaye said to him: This is what Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The reason is so that they not leave the court confounded, without reaching some definite conclusion, as this would tarnish the reputation of the court.

איכא דאמרי א"ל רב פפא לאביי ולמה לי יוסיפו ליפטריה מבי דינא קמא אמר ליה ר' יוסי קאי כוותך דתניא ר' יוסי אומר כשם שאין מוסיפין על ב"ד של שבעים ואחד כך אין מוסיפין על ב"ד של עשרים ושלשה

Some say that this is what Rav Pappa said to Abaye: But why do I need them to add judges at all when they should release him from the first court? Once the first court did not find him liable, they should release him. Why add judges? Abaye said to him: Rabbi Yosei holds in accordance with your opinion, as it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yosei says: Just as the court does not add judges to a court of seventy-one, so too, the court does not add judges to a court of twenty-three. If the court of twenty-three cannot arrive at a verdict, they release him.

ת"ר אומר בדיני ממונות נזדקן הדין ואין אומר בדיני נפשות נזדקן הדין

The Sages taught: In cases of monetary law one says: The judgment has grown aged, i.e., this matter is very difficult and requires scrutiny, but in cases of capital law one does not say: The judgment has grown aged.

מאי נזדקן הדין אילימא קש דינא איפכא מיבעיא ליה אמר רב הונא בר מנוח משמיה דרב אחא בריה דרב איקא איפוך רב אשי אמר לעולם לא תיפוך ומאי נזדקן הדין חכם דינא

The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of: The judgment has grown aged? If we say that the intention is: The judgment has aged, i.e., taken an extended amount of time but requires additional deliberations, if so, he should say the reverse, as it is more critical to extend deliberations in cases of capital law than in cases of monetary law. Rav Huna bar Manoaḥ said in the name of Rav Aḥa, son of Rav Ika: Reverse the statement, and say that in cases of monetary law one does not say: The judgment has grown aged, but in cases of capital law one does say it. Rav Ashi said: Actually, do not reverse it. And what is the meaning of: The judgment has grown aged? It means that the judgment has grown wise, like an elder who has acquired wisdom. In other words, the deliberations have been exhausted, and it is time to vote on a verdict.

מיתיבי גדול שבדיינין אומר נזדקן הדין אי אמרת בשלמא חכם דינא היינו דאמר גדול אלא אי אמרת קש דינא לא סגיא דלא אמר גדול כסופי הוא דקא מיכסיף נפשיה

The Gemara raises an objection to the first explanation from a baraita: In a situation where they did not reach a decision, the greatest among the judges says: The judgment has grown aged. The Gemara explains the objection: Granted, if you say this means: The judgment has grown wise, this would be why the baraita states that the greatest judge says this statement, as arriving at a verdict is an honor for the court, and consequently the greatest of the court should be the one to announce it. But if you say this means: The judgment has aged, is it not enough that the greatest among the judges in particular not say so? Must he humiliate himself by stating that they cannot reach a verdict?

אין אינו דומה מתבייש מעצמו למתבייש מאחרים

The Gemara answers: Yes, the greatest of the judges must also announce that the court cannot reach a verdict. Being shamed by oneself is not comparable to being shamed by others. Therefore, it is preferable that the greatest of the judges state this conclusion, rather than having one of the more junior judges state it.

איכא דאמרי אי אמרת בשלמא קש דינא היינו דאינו דומה מתבייש מעצמו למתבייש מאחרים אלא אי אמרת חכם דינא גדול אשבוחי משבח נפשיה והכתיב (משלי כז, ב) יהללך זר ולא פיך

Some say they raised an objection to the second explanation: Granted, if you say this means: The judgment has aged, this would be the reason that the greatest one states it, because being shamed by oneself is not comparable to being shamed by others. But if you say this means: The judgment has grown wise, should the greatest judge praise himself? But isn’t it written: “Let another man praise you, and not your own mouth, a stranger and not your own lips” (Proverbs 27:2)?

שאני מילתא דבי דינא דאגדול רמיא כדתנן גמרו את הדבר היו מכניסין אותן גדול שבדיינין אומר איש פלוני אתה זכאי איש פלוני אתה חייב:

The Gemara answers: A matter of the court is different, as its administration is incumbent upon the greatest judge. As we learned in a mishna (29a): When they finished deliberating the matter, they would bring in the litigants. The greatest of the judges would say: So-and-so, you are exempt from paying; or: So-and-so, you are liable to pay.



הדרן עלך היו בודקין