Save
Copy
Add to Collection
Export to Google Docs
Share[texts pulled from Shalom Hartman Institute July 2025 Rabbinic Torah Seminar]
אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק: גְּדוֹלָה עֲבֵירָה לִשְׁמָהּ מִמִּצְוָה שֶׁלֹּא לִשְׁמָהּ. וְהָאָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב: לְעוֹלָם יַעֲסוֹק אָדָם בְּתוֹרָה וּבְמִצְוֹת אֲפִילּוּ שֶׁלֹּא לִשְׁמָן, שֶׁמִּתּוֹךְ שֶׁלֹּא לִשְׁמָן בָּא לִשְׁמָן? אֶלָּא אֵימָא: כְּמִצְוָה שֶׁלֹּא לִשְׁמָהּ. דִּכְתִיב: ״תְּבֹרַךְ מִנָּשִׁים יָעֵל אֵשֶׁת חֶבֶר הַקֵּינִי מִנָּשִׁים בָּאֹהֶל תְּבֹרָךְ״. מַאן נָשִׁים שֶׁבָּאֹהֶל — שָׂרָה רִבְקָה רָחֵל וְלֵאָה. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: שֶׁבַע בְּעִילוֹת בָּעַל אוֹתוֹ רָשָׁע בְּאוֹתָהּ שָׁעָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״בֵּין רַגְלֶיהָ כָּרַע נָפַל שָׁכָב וְגוֹ׳״. וְהָא קָא מִתְהַנְיָא מִבְּעִילָה דִילֵיהּ? אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: כׇּל טוֹבָתָן שֶׁל רְשָׁעִים — אֵינָהּ אֶלָּא רָעָה אֵצֶל צַדִּיקִים,
§ Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: Greater is a transgression committed for its own sake, i.e., for the sake of Heaven, than a mitzva performed not for its own sake. The Gemara questions this comparison: But didn’t Rav Yehuda say that Rav said: A person should always occupy himself with Torah and mitzvot even not for their own sake, as it is through acts performed not for their own sake that good deeds for their own sake come about? How, then, can any transgression be considered greater than a mitzva not for the sake of Heaven? Rather, one must emend the above statement and say as follows: A transgression for the sake of Heaven is equivalent to a mitzva not for its own sake. The proof is as it is written: “Blessed above women shall Yael be, the wife of Hever the Kenite, above women in the tent she shall be blessed” (Judges 5:24), and it is taught: Who are these “women in the tent?” They are Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel, and Leah.Yael’s forbidden intercourse with Sisera for the sake of Heaven is compared to the sexual intercourse in which the Matriarchs engaged. The Gemara asks: How is it derived that Yael engaged in sexual intercourse with Sisera? As Rabbi Yoḥanan said: That wicked one,Sisera, engaged in seven acts of sexual intercourse with Yaelat that time, as it is stated: “Between her feet he sunk, he fell, he lay; between her feet he sunk, he fell; where he sunk, there he fell down dead” (Judges 5:27). Each mention of falling is referring to another act of intercourse. The Gemara asks: ButYael at least enjoyed the sexual intercourse with him; why is the verse so effusive in her praise? Rabbi Yoḥanan said: All the good of the wicked, i.e., anything good received from wicked people, is nothing other than evil for the righteous, and therefore she certainly derived no pleasure from the act.
אָמַר רַב כָּהֲנָא: סַנְהֶדְרִי שֶׁרָאוּ כּוּלָּן לְחוֹבָה – פּוֹטְרִין אוֹתוֹ. מַאי טַעְמָא? כֵּיוָן דִּגְמִירִי הֲלָנַת דִּין לְמֶעְבַּד לֵיהּ זְכוּתָא, וְהָנֵי תּוּ לָא חָזוּ לֵיהּ.
§ Rav Kahana says: In a Sanhedrin where all the judges saw fit to convict the defendant in a case of capital law, they acquit him. The Gemara asks: What is the reasoning for this halakha? It is since it is learned as a tradition that suspension of the trial overnight is necessary in order to create a possibility of acquittal. The halakha is that they may not issue the guilty verdict on the same day the evidence was heard, as perhaps over the course of the night one of the judges will think of a reason to acquit the defendant. And as those judges all saw fit to convict him they will not see any further possibility to acquit him, because there will not be anyone arguing for such a verdict. Consequently, he cannot be convicted.
Assume that the judge in question is convinced of the guilt of the accused. He is aware that his opinion is shared by all his colleagues. The judge in question realizes that if he votes his conscience, this will make the vote unanimous and result in the accused (who he thinks is guilty) going free. In order to prevent this from happening our judge resolves to vote "innocent"; in order to ensure that the accused will be convicted. By doing so our judge convinces himself that he merely ensures that the majority will prevail, a laudatory objective. however, morally speaking, this too is a way in which a single judge imposes the outcome of a trial on the majority. To prevent this from happening the Torah wrote לא תענה ריב לנטות אחרי רבים neither shall you vote in a dispute so as to ensure the vote will be based on a majority (as opposed to unanimity). The Torah explained the reason for this legislation as being להטית, i.e. that the individual judge in question attempts to pervert the outcome of the proceedings by not voting his conscience.
