Talmud su Esodo 21:14

HALAKHAH: “The deviant and rebellious son,” etc. Rebbi Zeˋira, Rebbi Abbahu, Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. It is written: If a man would concoct against his neighbor to kill him slyly⁷Ex. 21:14. The argument is an almost untranslatable pun, identifying the two meanings of the root זוד “to plot, to be mischievous” and “to cook” (Babli 69a). (Gesenius-Buhl also notes the two meanings for the root; modern Jewish lexicographers following Ben Jehudah prefer to derive the hapax “to cook” from a root נזד.). When does he become a man? When he concocts. When is he done cooking? When his palm⁸Palm as anatomic detail denotes the mons veneris of a woman (Yebamot 1:2, Note 143); it is used here for the corresponding pubic area of the man. expands. A simile: If the seed is fully cooked inside, the pot becomes black on the outside. Rebbi Zeˋira said that Rebbi Shila bar Bina stated: If a man have a son, not that the son be a father. From the moment that he may come to a woman and make her pregnant, he is a potential father, not a son⁹While it is accepted that from the age of 9 years a male may be able to have full intercourse with a woman (Yebamot 3:10 Note 143), he cannot be held responsible for his actions before he reaches age 13. Therefore, he can be a responsible father only at age 13. The Babli (68b,69b) and the Yerushalmi (Yebamot 10:14, Notes 209–211; copied Qiddušin 1:2 59c l. 26, p. 73) recognize the fact that an underage male may become a father. The son born to an underage father can never become deviant and rebellious since he is not the son of a man as required by the verse.. But the Torah said, a son, not a father. It parallels what Rebbi Yasa said in the name of Rebbi Sabbatai: The entire period of a “deviant and rebellious son” is only six months¹⁰Since everywhere in talmudic literature the period between onset of female puberty and full feminine development is taken to be six months, the same is asserted here for the male. In the Babli, 69a, R. Sabbatai determines this period as three months..

It was stated: Rebbi Simeon ben Ioḥai said, by the mouth of two witnesses shall the dead die²⁰Deut. 17:6. In the Babli, this is an Amoraic argument. The verse is read as: by the mouth of two witnesses shall the dead kill himself, i. e., in the presence of two witnesses he accepts to be killed.. Does he die when dead? But to tell him by which kind of death he will be executed. It was stated: Rebbi Jehudah ben Rebbi Illai said, and if a man intentionally kill his neighbor knowingly²¹Ex. 21:14, Babli 41a. Babli and Mekhiltot read the verse as freeing the mentally disabled from prosecution.; they shall inform him by which kind of death he will be executed.

Could one not judge him on Fridays, pass sentence on the Sabbath, and execute him after the Sabbath? If you say so, it turns out that his judgment is delayed⁵⁴This argument really implies that capital crimes be tried only by the Supreme Court whose decrees are final.. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish asked, could he not be judged on the Sabbath, have his sentence passed on the Sabbath, and be executed on the Sabbath? Temple service, which supersedes Sabbath prohibitions⁵⁵The Sabbath Temple service, as prescribed in Num. 28:10, requires slaughtering and burning. For any other purpose, these are deadly sins and capital crimes if done on the Sabbath., is pushed aside by obligatory executions, since it is said, from My altar take him to be executed⁵⁶Ex. 21:14. The verse is read, not as a denial of asylum for any murderer, but as a commandment to immediately execute a Cohen even if he was officiating when convicted of murder. (The non-Cohen would commit a deadly sin by touching the altar.). Therefore the Sabbath, which is pushed aside by Temple service, logically should be pushed aside by obligatory executions⁵⁷The argument deserves no refutation since the relation “stronger than” underlying an argument de minore ad majus is not transitive (a stronger than b, b stronger than c does not imply a stronger than c. Babli Šabbat 132b; cf. H. Guggenheimer, Logical Problems in Jewish Tradition, in: Confrontations with Judaism, London 1967, pp. 182–183.) The Babli, 35b, disproves the argument at length.. Rebbi La in the name of Rebbi Yannai: This⁵⁸Mishnah 6. implies that courts may not sit on the Sabbath; what is the reason? It is said here, in all your dwellings⁵⁹Ex. 35:3, the prohibition to start a fire on the Sabbath., and it is said there, these shall be for you legal procedures for your generations in all your dwellings⁶⁰Num. 35:29, the law of homicide and murder. The argument (Babli 35b) goes as follows. Some capital crimes are punished by burning. Ex. 35:3, which has been shown to be applicable to court proceedings, forbids executing a convicted criminal who has to be burned. Therefore no capital punishment can be executed on the Sabbath.. Since there the verse refers to courts, so also here the verse refers to courts.