Talmud su Deuteronomio 18:22
אֲשֶׁר֩ יְדַבֵּ֨ר הַנָּבִ֜יא בְּשֵׁ֣ם יְהוָ֗ה וְלֹֽא־יִהְיֶ֤ה הַדָּבָר֙ וְלֹ֣א יָב֔וֹא ה֣וּא הַדָּבָ֔ר אֲשֶׁ֥ר לֹא־דִבְּר֖וֹ יְהוָ֑ה בְּזָדוֹן֙ דִּבְּר֣וֹ הַנָּבִ֔יא לֹ֥א תָג֖וּר מִמֶּֽנּוּ׃ (ס)
Quando un profeta parla nel nome dell'Eterno, se la cosa non segue, né si manifesta, questa è la cosa che l'Eterno non ha detto; il profeta l'ha detto presuntuosamente, non avrai paura di lui.
Jerusalem Talmud Sanhedrin
Rebbi Zeˋira said, it says here “criminal” and it says there “criminal”, the prophet said it criminally284Deut. 18:22, the law of the false prophet. “Here” refers to the judge who refuses to obey the rulings of the Supreme Court, who acts criminally in his disobedience and is tried before the Supreme Court, Deut. 17:8–12.. Since about “criminal” used there, the verse speaks about a false prophet, also about “criminal” used here, the verse speaks about a false prophet285The verse does not speak about a false prophet but about a lower court judge who refuses to accept the authority of the Supreme Court. What is meant is that the procedural details given for the treatment of the rebellious judge also apply to the treatment of the false prophet. The argument is known as הֶקֵּשׁ “trap”. If the same word is used in two contexts, details found in one context and left indeterminate in the other can be transferred from one to the other. As a hermeneutic principle, heqqeš should be used only if the word in question is not loaded with additional meaning. But in Sifry Deut. 178, the expression “criminal” is interpreted to mean that the false prophet may be prosecuted only if criminal intent can be shown, not if he acted in error.
In the Babli, 16a, the argument is in the name of R. Yose ben Hanina.. Rebbi Ḥizqiah said, it says here “spoke” and it says there, that the prophet would speak in the Eternal’s name. Since about “spoke” used there, the verse speaks about a false prophet, also about “spoke” used here, the verse speaks about a false prophet.286It seems that the heqqeš should not be about the verb דִּבֵּר but the noun דָּבָר “pronouncement”, referring to the judgment of the Supreme Court in case of the rebellious judge, Deut. 17:10, and the false prophet who pronounces in the Eternal’s name, Deut. 18:20.
In the Babli, 16a, the argument is in the name of R. Yose ben Hanina.. Rebbi Ḥizqiah said, it says here “spoke” and it says there, that the prophet would speak in the Eternal’s name. Since about “spoke” used there, the verse speaks about a false prophet, also about “spoke” used here, the verse speaks about a false prophet.286It seems that the heqqeš should not be about the verb דִּבֵּר but the noun דָּבָר “pronouncement”, referring to the judgment of the Supreme Court in case of the rebellious judge, Deut. 17:10, and the false prophet who pronounces in the Eternal’s name, Deut. 18:20.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy