Sanhedrin 78a

סנהדרין ע״ח ע״א

Learn Sanhedrin 78a step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Sanhedrin 78a in Gemara Clarity

Topic

Shared and partial killing (גוסס, טריפה), רבא's rulings about a טריפה, the snake-bite case, and a victim who improved before dying

Overview

The amud opens by finishing an earlier answer: a thrower's force is 'weak,' but it still counts as his. A ברייתא then teaches that if ten people beat a man to death, all are פטור, while רבי יהודה בן בתירא makes the last attacker חייב when the blows came one after another. רבי יוחנן shows that both sides read ״כל נפש״ differently. רבא narrows the argument: everyone agrees that killing a טריפה is פטור and that killing a גוסס בידי שמים is חייב, so they argue only about a גוסס בידי אדם. A ברייתא recited before רב ששת is corrected and shown to follow רבי יהודה בן בתירא. Next comes a series of rulings by רבא about a טריפה: as a murderer, as a sinner with a male, as a witness, and as the owner of an ox. Several of them rest on the rule that testimony which can never face הזמה is not testimony, and רב אשי disagrees on two of them. The גמרא then explains the snake case in the משנה: it depends on whether the venom sits ready in the snake's teeth or the snake releases it itself. Finally a new משנה asks about a victim who improved and then died, and the גמרא starts bringing רבי נחמיה's פסוק, which continues on the next amud.

Opening lines

The steps (34)

1. ResolutionHis force is weak, but it is still his force
2. StatementTen people hit a man with ten sticks: the first view
3. StatementThe last attacker is liable for making death come sooner
4. StatementBoth sides read the same פסוק differently
5. StatementTwo cases where everyone agrees
6. ConclusionThe argument is only about a person dying from human blows
7. QuestionWhy not compare him to one dying by Heaven?
8. ResponseA person already acted on him
9. QuestionWhy not compare him to a טריפה?
10. ResponseA טריפה's vital organs are already cut
11. StatementA ברייתא about a second attacker who finishes the killing
12. ChallengeIf the first blow could not kill, that's obvious
13. ResolutionChange the wording: the first blow could kill
14. ConclusionThis ברייתא follows רבי יהודה בן בתירא
15. StatementKilling a טריפה, and a טריפה who kills
16. QuestionWhy is the טריפה liable in front of the court?
17. ResponseThe פסוק, and the problem of testimony that cannot face הזמה
18. StatementThe same rulings for forbidden relations with a male
19. ChallengeWhy say the second ruling at all?
20. ResolutionThe new point: relations with a טריפה are still punished
21. Statementרבא on witnesses and a טריפה
22. Statementרב אשי: טריפה witnesses are not killed
23. Statementרבא on an ox that kills
24. QuestionWhy is the ox of a טריפה exempt?
25. ResponseThe verse links the ox to its owner
26. Statementרב אשי: even a טריפה ox is exempt
27. Responseרב אשי's reason: the ox is like its owner
28. StatementBack to the משנה: setting a dog on someone
29. StatementFor רבי יהודה, the venom is already in the snake's teeth
30. ConclusionThe one who presses the fangs is killed, the snake is exempt
31. StatementThe חכמים' view: the snake releases its own venom
32. ConclusionSo the snake is stoned and the person is exempt
33. StatementNew משנה: victim improved, then got worse and died
34. Statementברייתא: the פסוק רבי נחמיה expounded