The Eddie B. Sit edition of the Talmud Bavli, specifically Sanhedrin, continues on Kuf Yud Aleph Amud Bet. This Masechet has been sponsored anonymously for the complete recovery of Dinah bat Sarah. Today’s Daf, Kuf Yud Bet, is studied for the elevation of the soul of Avraham ben Ester and is also sponsored for the recovery of Dinah bat Sarah. We begin the Gemara following the long Mishnah, focusing on the laws of the subverted city, a city whose inhabitants have been led astray to worship idolatry.
The Gemara analyzes the biblical verse regarding those who lead the city astray, noting that the seducers must be the individuals themselves and not their messengers. Even if residents of the city hire agents from elsewhere to perform the seduction, the laws of the subverted city do not apply; the act must be carried out by the residents personally. Furthermore, the use of the plural term "men" implies a minimum of two seducers. This excludes women and minors from being the primary seducers who define the city as subverted. These individuals are described as "base men," a term interpreted to mean those who have cast off the yoke of Heaven from their shoulders. The seducers must also come from within the city itself and not from a border city. Additionally, the process requires that each individual inhabitant be warned in the presence of witnesses before they can be held liable.
A fundamental debate arises between Rabbi Yochanan and Reish Lakish regarding the tribal division of land in Eretz Yisrael. Rabbi Yochanan maintains that a single city could be divided between two different tribes, whereas Reish Lakish argues that cities were never split between tribes. Rabbi Yochanan attempts to prove his position from the Mishnah, which states that the seducers must be from the same city and the same tribe. He argues that this implies a city could contain multiple tribes. However, the Gemara suggests that a member of a different tribe might reside in a city through inheritance or as a gift, which would not prove that the city was originally divided by Yehoshua. A further proof is brought from the nine cities given to the tribe of Shevet Levi from the territories of Yehuda and Reuven. If nine cities were taken from two tribes, it suggests a split of four and a half cities each. The Gemara counters that it could simply be four cities from one and five from the other. While the language of the verse remains a difficulty for the view that cities were not split, it is not a conclusive refutation.
The Gemara then questions what the law would be if the inhabitants of a city turned to idolatry spontaneously, without being seduced by others. While the Torah specifically mentions seduction, one might argue that spontaneous idolatry should be treated with equal or greater severity. Evidence is brought from the fact that seduction by women or minors is insufficient to trigger the laws of a subverted city. If spontaneous idolatry were sufficient, it should not be less effective than seduction by unqualified individuals. However, the Gemara distinguishes between the two, noting that following the seduction of others is different from following one's own heart, leaving the question unresolved.
The technical process of judging a subverted city presents a logical challenge. Inhabitants who worship idolatry are normally punished by stoning as individuals, but if they constitute a majority of the city, the punishment changes to the sword and their property is destroyed. Rav Yehuda suggests that as individuals are found guilty, they are judged for stoning and incarcerated. Once the guilty reach a majority, they are retried and executed by the sword. Ulla objects to this, arguing that it constitutes a prohibited delay of justice. Ulla instead proposes that individuals are stoned as they are convicted until the majority mark is hit, at which point the law shifts to the sword for all subsequent defendants. Reish Lakish suggests a different approach: convene many courts simultaneously to judge the entire city in a single day, thereby avoiding any delay. Although a subverted city must be judged by the Beit Din ha-Gadol in Yerushalayim, the Gemara explains that local courts could perform the initial investigation and then send the completed cases to the Beit Din ha-Gadol for the final ruling.
Regarding the definition of a resident, the Gemara distinguishes between a citizen and a temporary dweller. While tax obligations might require twelve months of residency, the laws of the subverted city apply to anyone who has stayed for thirty days, such as traveling donkey or camel drivers. If such wayfarers stay for thirty days and participate in the idolatry, they are counted toward the majority and are executed by the sword, and their property is destroyed. If they have stayed for less than thirty days, they are treated as individuals and punished by stoning, and their property is spared.
The Torah mandates the destruction of all property within a subverted city. This includes the assets of righteous people who lived there, though their property located outside the city is saved. In contrast, the property of the wicked is destroyed even if it is located outside the city, provided it can be brought into the city within one day and was originally associated with the city. Rabbi Shimon explains that the righteous lose their local property as a punishment for choosing to reside in a corrupt city for the sake of their financial interests. If the city held collateral belonging to residents of another city, that property is spared. Even if the residents of the subverted city had accepted financial responsibility for the collateral, it is not considered their property and is not destroyed.
Specific rules apply to partnerships and types of property. If an animal is owned half by a resident of the subverted city and half by an outsider, the entire animal must be destroyed because ritual slaughter cannot be performed on only half an animal. However, a batch of dough owned in such a partnership can be divided, and the half belonging to the outsider is saved. The Gemara also considers whether the ritual slaughter of an animal in a subverted city prevents it from being considered a ritually impure carcass, but this remains undecided. Regarding the hair of righteous women, natural hair is not destroyed because it is part of the body and requires cutting rather than mere collection. Wigs, however, present a doubt: if the woman is wearing the wig, it is treated like clothing and spared, but if it is on a stand, it is unclear if it is treated as property to be burned or as a garment to be saved.
A city cannot be classified as subverted unless it has a public square. Rabbi Yishmael holds that the square must have existed before the idolatry began, while Rabbi Akiva maintains that a square can be created after the fact to fulfill the requirement. Regarding consecrated items, a distinction is made between different types of holiness. Animals consecrated for the altar cannot be sacrificed because the "sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination," nor can they be redeemed because the money would be tainted; therefore, they are left to die. Items consecrated for Temple maintenance, however, are redeemed, and the money is given to the Temple. Holy writings and the second tithe are placed in permanent storage. Rabbi Shimon adds that firstborn animals and animal tithes are spared because they are not considered the "property" of the residents in a standard sense. Shmuel disagrees, arguing that if an animal does not require redemption when it becomes blemished, it is considered the owner's property and must be destroyed.
Finally, the Gemara discusses the priestly tithe. If the tithe is in the hands of an ordinary Israelite, it should be given to a priest in another city. If it is already in the hands of a priest living in the subverted city, it is considered his property. While it should technically be burned, out of respect for its sanctity, it is instead left to rot. A similar discussion involves the second tithe. If the second tithe was brought to Yerushalayim and became ritually impure, it would normally be redeemed. However, if it had already been purchased with tithe money, it cannot be redeemed a second time and must be placed in storage. This concludes the exploration of these complex logical and legal distinctions within the laws of the subverted city.