Sanhedrin 85b

סנהדרין פ״ה ע״ב

Learn Sanhedrin 85b step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Sanhedrin 85b in Gemara Clarity

Topic

A son as the court's agent against his father, striking versus cursing a parent, and the laws of kidnapping

Overview

The amud opens by finishing an earlier discussion. Cursing a father on his way to execution is punishable, just like cursing a parent after death. Then comes the final ruling: a son is never the court's agent to strike or curse his father, except when the father is a מסית. A new משנה teaches that hitting a parent is a capital crime only if it causes a חבורה, while cursing is punishable even after the parent's death. The גמרא finds the source for this in the פסוק and explains how רבי יאשיה and רבי יונתן each read the פסוקים about cursing a parent. It then shows that the תנא of the משנה compares striking to cursing, and it proves from two ברייתות about a כותי that תנאים argue about this comparison. A second משנה turns to גניבת נפש (kidnapping): when the kidnapper becomes liable, and the arguments about kidnapping one's own son or a half-slave. The גמרא discusses what counts as 'using' the victim and leaves רבי ירמיה's question unanswered (תיקו). It ends with ברייתות listing which kidnappers and victims bring liability.

Opening lines

The steps (41)

1. ResolutionCursing a father about to die is like cursing him after death
2. QuestionWhat was the final ruling?
3. ResponseA son is never the agent to punish his father, except for a מסית
4. StatementHitting a parent is punishable only if it causes a wound
5. StatementCursing is stricter than hitting: it applies even after death
6. StatementA ברייתא learns the after-death rule from the פסוק
7. StatementWhy the פסוק is needed: we might have compared cursing to hitting
8. StatementA second reason we might have exempted cursing after death
9. StatementThe verse teaches liability for cursing after death
10. ChallengeThis works for רבי יונתן, but what about רבי יאשיה?
11. Proofרבי יאשיה uses the verse for cursing just one parent
12. Statementרבי יונתן: 'and' can also mean each one alone
13. QuestionWhere does רבי יאשיה learn the after-death law?
14. ResponseHe learns it from the פסוק in שמות
15. QuestionWhat does רבי יונתן do with that פסוק?
16. ResponseIt includes a daughter, a טומטום, and an אנדרוגינוס
17. ChallengeWhy not learn them from 'איש איש'?
18. ResolutionThe Torah speaks like people speak
19. ChallengeWhy not list another way striking is stricter than cursing?
20. ResolutionThe משנה compares striking to cursing
21. QuestionTwo ברייתות about striking and cursing a כותי
22. ProofThe suggested reason the ברייתות argue
23. RejectionThey really argue about whether כותים are true converts
24. ChallengeThe second ברייתא treats a כותי's ox like a Jew's ox
25. ConclusionConclusion: the ברייתות argue about comparing striking to cursing
26. StatementNew משנה: when a kidnapper becomes liable
27. StatementKidnapping one's own son
28. StatementKidnapping a half-slave, half-free person
29. ChallengeDoes the first תנא really not need 'using'?
30. ResolutionThey argue about use worth less than a פרוטה
31. Questionרבי ירמיה asks: is this a kind of 'using'?
32. ChallengeThere is no using at all here
33. ResolutionThe question is about leaning on a sleeper or using a woman to block the wind
34. ConclusionThe question stays unanswered
35. StatementA woman who kidnaps is also liable
36. QuestionWhat about a woman who kidnaps a woman?
37. Response'That kidnapper shall die' means every case
38. StatementWhich victims make the kidnapper liable
39. StatementNo liability without a completed sale
40. StatementSelling the victim to his own relatives still counts
41. StatementKidnapping slaves is exempt