Kiddushin 43a

קידושין מ״ג ע״א

Learn Kiddushin 43a step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Kiddushin 43a in Gemara Clarity

Topic

אין שליח לדבר עבירה (its source and שמאי's view on a sender to murder), and whether a שליח can also be an עד

Overview

The גמרא asks why we don't learn from מעילה and from a thief's טביחה ומכירה that a sender is responsible for a sin his שליח commits. It answers that these are שני כתובים הבאים כאחד, two verses that teach the same idea, and such verses cannot be a model for other cases. According to the opinion that two such verses do teach, the תורה says "that man" twice about שחוטי חוץ, and the extra word spreads the rule אין שליח לדבר עבירה to the whole תורה. The גמרא then explains how each opinion reads the words "הוא" and "ההוא". Next comes a ברייתא in which שמאי הזקן says a man who sends someone to kill is liable, based on the פסוק about דוד and אוריה. The גמרא gives three ways to explain שמאי. רבא adds that even שמאי agrees the sender is exempt for sins of pleasure like ערוה and חלב. Finally, רב and דבי רבי שילא argue whether a שליח can also be an עד, and the הלכה is that he can. So two agents sent for קידושין or גירושין also serve as the witnesses, and that statement continues on the next amud.

Opening lines

The steps (41)

1. ChallengeWhy not learn a general rule from the exceptions?
2. ResolutionTwo verses that teach the same idea cannot be a model
3. QuestionWhere is the verse for slaughtering and selling?
4. ResponseSlaughter is compared to sale
5. Statementדבי רבי ישמעאל: the word "or" includes an agent
6. Statementדבי חזקיה: the word "in place of" includes an agent
7. ChallengeWhat about the opinion that two verses do teach?
8. Resolutionשחוטי חוץ shows the sender is not liable
9. QuestionHow do we know this for the whole תורה?
10. ResponseThe whole תורה learns from שחוטי חוץ
11. ChallengeWhy learn from slaughtering outside and not from the other cases?
12. ResolutionThe extra word teaches the rule for the whole תורה
13. QuestionWhat does the other view learn from the two words
14. ResponseTwo people slaughtering together, and someone forced or mistaken
15. QuestionWhere does the first view learn these laws
16. ResponseHe learns from both parts of the word
17. QuestionWhy the second view does not do the same
18. ResponseHe does not learn from the extra letter
19. ChallengeA teaching about sending someone to kill
20. QuestionWhat is שמאי's reason?
21. Responseשמאי learns from the two verses and does not use הוא/ההוא
22. Resolutionשמאי means liable only by Heaven's laws
23. ChallengeWould the תנא קמא say he is fully exempt even from Heaven?
24. ResolutionA big judgment versus a small judgment
25. ResolutionMurder is different because the verse says so
26. ResponseHow the other view reads the verse
27. ResponseUriah was a rebel against the king
28. StatementEven שמאי agrees about forbidden relations and forbidden fat
29. StatementCan an agent also be a witness
30. QuestionWhy does the school of Rabbi Sheila disqualify the agent
31. ChallengeRejecting the idea that he was never appointed as a witness
32. Resolutionרב's reason: the agent's testimony is stronger
33. Resolutionרבי שילא's reason: the agent counts as the sender himself
34. ChallengeA ברייתא about sending three people to betroth a woman
35. ChallengeWith only two people, everyone agrees agents are not witnesses
36. Resolutionרב follows the version of רבי נתן
37. ChallengeWould רב really follow בית שמאי?
38. ResolutionReverse the opinions
39. Resolutionרב אחא בריה דרבא reports the dispute the other way around
40. ConclusionThe halacha: an agent can be a witness
41. StatementTwo agents are also the two witnesses