Talmud su Deuteronomio 13:2

Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina: The rabbis explain that the inhabitants of a seduced city¹⁸A city which by vote of city council and population decides to become pagan. Its inhabitants have to be killed by the sword (Deut. 13:13–19). Individual apostates to paganism have to be stoned (Deut. 17:5). should have been included in the category of idolaters, by stoning. They were treated to a less painful way of execution; that should be by burning¹⁹Just one degree less than stoning.. It is not enough that you decree for them an easier death by burning, but should you have them judged by the easiest way, by strangulation²⁰This is the rabbis’ argument to prove that beheading is worse than strangulation. If the punishment of the inhabitants of the seduced city were the easiest way of execution, the verse simply should have decreed the unspecified death penalty. Since beheading was specified, it must be worse than the unspecified death penalty.
The reason behind the argument is R. Ismael’s tenth hermeneutical principle [Sifra Wayyiqra Pereq 1(2)], that special treatment for a crime already treated in general always expresses a leniency, not greater strictness.? Rebbi Simeon explained: The false prophet²¹Deut. 13:2–6. He is described as a missionary for paganism; his sentence is “death” which means strangulation for the rabbis and beheading for R. Simeon. should have been included in the category of idolaters, by burning²²This makes no sense since it contradicts Deut. 17:5. The first two sentences of the argument attributed to R. Simeon are simply taken from the rabbis’ argument with stoning and burning switched, even though the argument is irrelevant.. He was treated to a less painful way of execution, which should be by stoning. It is not enough that you decree for them an easier death by stoning, but you have him judged by the easiest way, by beheading²³Since the rabbis must agree that the false prophet be executed in the least painful way, they agree that once a punishment is reduced, it may be reduced to the lowest level; the rabbis’ argument in Note 20 is contradicted. The mention of death by the sword in Deut. 13:16 may be an example of the third hermeneutical rule, “a general principle exemplified once”..

Rebbi Ismael did formulate: In the Torah there are forbidden matters and permitted matters. There are easy parts and severe parts. But in the words of the Sages all are severe¹⁸⁴Since their essential duty is to build “a fence around the Law”, it is in the nature of the institutions of the Sopherim, the men of the Great Assembly headed by Ezra and their successors before the period of the Rabbis, to be more restrictive than the original precepts of the Torah.. You can realize that this is so since we have stated (Mishnah Sanhedrin 11:5): “If he¹⁸⁵The Mishnah speaks about the זקן ממרא, the rebellious religious leader, who does not accept the rulings of the supreme court sitting in the Temple court. If he asserts something that goes against the text of the Torah, he is not dangerous and not criminally liable since every child that has learned to read realizes his error. But if he asserts something in contradiction to an authoritative teaching of the oral law asserted by the Synhedrion, then he has committed a capital crime.
In the Babli, the reference is to Mishnah Sanhedrin 10:5. The interpretation of the law is much more restrictive in the Babli than in the Yerushalmi. says there is no obligation of Tefillin against the words of the Torah he is not criminally liable. If he says that Tefillin have five sections, to add to the words of the Sages, he is guilty.” Rebbi Ḥananiah, the son of Rebbi Ada¹⁸⁶A preacher of the fourth generation of Galilean Amoraïm whose name is quoted also as Ḥanina or Ḥinnena. His teacher R. Tanḥum bar Ḥiyya was from Kefar Agin (Umm Junia) South of the Sea of Galilee., in the name of Rebbi Tanḥum the son of Rebbi Ḥiyya: The words of the Sages carry more weight than those of the prophets, since it is written (Micah 2:6): “Do not preach, they preach; Do not preach to those, that shame does not reach you.¹⁸⁷Only false prophets will preach to such a generation, whereas the true prophet gets his orders from God not to preach. According to Rashi, טיף means “speak about your visions”, rather than the commonly used “preach”.” And it is written (Micah 2:11) “I shall preach to you for wine and liquor.”¹⁸⁸The real inference is from the rest of the verse that is not quoted but assumed to be known to every student: “You shall preach to this people.” It follows that the prophet sometimes is ordered to be silent and sometimes to speak but the sage is ordered to teach at all times. The relation of prophet and scholar can be compared to the case of a king who sent two of his palmatars¹⁸⁹The Arukh notes the word but gives no explanation. Mussaphia, in his Notes to Arukh, proposes the impossible Greco-Latin hybrid πόλεμο-- notarius, “secretary of war.” The best explanation seems to be that of A. Kohut, diplomatarius; the first syllable di was interpreted as Aramaic relative pronoun (Hebrew שֶׁ) and, therefore, dropped. Diplomatarius is a late (Byzantine) form of diplomarius, the holder of an imperial diploma, a “doubly folded” imperial order or privilege which gave its holder the right to use the imperial mails for transportation. The two diplomatarii arrive in the province by imperial mail but this does not imply that they are plenipotentiaries (since, sometimes, the privilege of using the mails was given to private citizens.) to a province. About one of them he wrote, if he does not show you my seal and σημαντήθιον¹⁹⁰Hebrew word (חוֹתם) “seal” and its Greek equivalent given as parallels., do not believe him. About the other one he wrote, even if he does not show you my seal, believe him without seal and σημαντήθιον. So about a prophet is written (Deut. 13:2) “He gives you a sign or miracle.” But here it is written (Deut. 17:11): “According to the teachings that they will teach you”¹⁹¹The reference is to the tradition attached to v. 9, that obliges one in cases of doubt to go the the Temple and ask “the judge who shall be in those days”. Since it is impossible to ask a judge who does not live in one’s days, this is taken to mean that any chief judge, even if not the most competent one, has the same status as any other living in another time. (Babli Rosh Hashanah 25b, Sifri Devarim 153)..

Rebbi Ismael stated: In the Torah there are forbidden matters and permitted matters. There are easy parts and severe parts. But in the words of the Sopherim all are severe. You can realize that this is so since we have stated: “He who says that there are no phylacteries, to transgress the words of the Torah, is not prosecutable. Five compartments to add to the words of the Sopherim is punishable.” Rebbi Ḥinena, the son of Rebbi Ada, in the name of Rebbi Tanḥum bar Ḥiyya: The words of the Sages carry more weight than those of the prophets since it is written, do not preach, they preach⁵⁸Micha 2:6.. And it is written, I shall preach to you for wine and liquor⁵⁹Micha 2:11.. The relation of prophet and scholar can be compared to the case of a king who sent two diplomatarii⁶⁰A person authorized to use the imperial mail; Berakhot 1:7 Note 189. to a province. About one of them it was written, if he does not show you my seal and σημαντήριον⁶¹“Seal” in Greek; Berakhot 1:7 Note 190., do not believe him. About the other it was written, even if he does not show you my seal and σημαντήριον, believe him. So about a prophet is written, he gives you a sign or miracle⁶²Deut. 13:2.. But here it is written, according to the teachings that they will teach you⁶³Deut. 17:11..