Skip to main content

Daf Notes: Sanhedrin 90



Notes on Sanhedrin 90

1. "כל ישראל יש להם חלק לעולם הבא" ("All Israel has a share in the World to Come") – Perhaps the "Yesh" in "יש להם" hints at the eternal existence of the soul as the portion of the World to Come, drawing from the Rambam’s explanation of "Yesh" as "המציאות התמידי" (eternal existence) in Uktzin 3:12, though it’s uncertain if he applies this directly to these words. The Rambam writes: "וענין אמרו שלש מאות ועשרה עולמות כאילו קובצו מעדני העולם הזה בכללם לפי חילוק מיני מעדניהם ואחר כך נכפל אותו המקובץ שלש מאות ועשר פעמים היה מה שיגיע אחד מן הצדיקים ממעדני העולם הבא כמו זה אמנם התעדן הזמן הזה אינו נחקר אבל כל נפש תזכה לחיי העולם הבא ולא תאבד לעולם והוא ענין יש ר"ל המציאות התמידי אשר לא יחקר לפי שיש הוא המציאות ואין הוא האפיסה וכאילו אומר כי אוהבי אנחיל את המציאות בפשיטות ואין שם מציאות האמתי אלא ההתמדה והוציא בפסוק הזה גדול התענוג על דרך משל ומספרם יש ג' מאות ועשרה וזה על דרך התעוררות בלבד כי אותו התענוג גדול אמנם האמת כי כמו שאין שווי בין הנחקר לאשר אינו נחקר כן אין שווי בין אלה המעדנים אשר אצלינו ואותם התענוגים וכבר ביארנו מזה קצת במסכת סנהדרין (פ"י)".

2. "האומר אין תחיית המתים מן התורה" – האומר אין תחיית המתים מן התורה, וברש"י אע"פ שמאמין שיש תחיית המתים רק כופר במדרש חכמים. וצ"ע לפי הגמרא איך זה מדה כנגד מדה.

3. "שָׁאֲלוּ רוֹמִיִּים אֶת רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן חֲנַנְיָה: מִנַּיִין שֶׁהַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא מְחַיֵּה מֵתִים, וְיוֹדֵעַ מַה שֶּׁעָתִיד לִהְיוֹת? אֲמַר לְהוּ: תַּרְוַויְיהוּ מִן הַמִּקְרָא הַזֶּה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וַיֹּאמֶר ה׳ אֶל מֹשֶׁה הִנְּךָ שֹׁכֵב עִם אֲבֹתֶיךָ וְקָם הָעָם הַזֶּה וְזָנָה״. וְדִילְמָא ״וְקָם הָעָם הַזֶּה וְזָנָה״? אֲמַר לְהוּ: נְקוּטוּ מִיהָא פַּלְגָא בִּידַיְיכוּ, דְּיוֹדֵעַ מַה שֶּׁעָתִיד לִהְיוֹת" – Why do the Romans pair foreknowledge and resurrection? Why does R. Yehoshua pick this verse? What does "take at least half" mean? The Romans challenge with a paradox—foreknowledge implies determinism, undermining afterlife reward—and R. Yehoshua chooses this verse because "וְקָם" lacks resolution (Rashi, "שאין לו הכרע"), hinting their tension is unresolvable too; his "half" means only one’s clear now, as Rambam writes in Hilchot Teshuva 5:5: "וכל דברי הראשונים והאחרונים כולם על דרך זו נאמרו עד שיאמרו על הקדוש ברוך הוא שהוא יודע כל מה שיהיה ויודע הוא אם יחטא זה או לא יחטא, ואם כן היכן הבחירה שלו? ואם תאמר שאינו יודע מה שיהיה הרי זה חסרון בו! דע שזו השאלה היא ארוכה מארץ מדה ורחבה מני ים..." (see also Raavad ad loc.).

4. "תַּנְיָא: אָמַר רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי: בְּדָבָר זֶה זִיַּיפְתִּי סִפְרֵי מִינִים, שֶׁהָיוּ אוֹמְרִים אֵין תְּחִיַּית הַמֵּתִים מִן הַתּוֹרָה. אָמַרְתִּי לָהֶן: זִיַּיפְתֶּם תּוֹרַתְכֶם וְלֹא הֶעֱלִיתֶם בְּיֶדְכֶם כְּלוּם, שֶׁאַתֶּם אוֹמְרִים אֵין תְּחִיַּית הַמֵּתִים מִן הַתּוֹרָה. הֲרֵי הוּא אוֹמֵר ״הִכָּרֵת תִּכָּרֵת הַנֶּפֶשׁ הַהִיא עֲוֹנָהּ בָּהּ״. ״הִכָּרֵת תִּכָּרֵת״ – בָּעוֹלָם הַזֶּה, ״עֲוֹנָהּ בָּהּ״ – לְאֵימַת? לָאו לָעוֹלָם הַבָּא?" –

I. The Manuscript Mystery: Framing the Samaritan Debate
The Talmud’s discussion in Sanhedrin 90b about resurrection of the dead appears, at first glance, to target generic heretics (minim). But hidden in the margins of history lies a key detail: early manuscripts like Munich 95 and the parallel passage in Sotah 49a explicitly name the Kutim—the Samaritans—as Rabbi Eliezer ben Yosei’s interlocutors. This textual variant isn’t trivial; it reframes the entire conversation. The Samaritans, a rival Israelite sect with their own Torah and temple, denied resurrection outright, claiming it had no basis in Scripture. Rabbi Eliezer’s retort—“You forged your Torah!”—isn’t a vague accusation. It’s a direct jab at their most infamous act: rewriting Deuteronomy to sanctify Mount Gerizim.

II. Origins of a Schism: Assyrian Conquest to Second Temple Rivalry
To grasp this debate, we need context:
- Assyrian Resettlement (722 BCE): After Assyria conquered the Northern Kingdom of Israel (2 Kings 17:24), they resettled foreign populations (including people from Kuta, modern Iraq) into Samaria. The Bible claims these settlers adopted Israelite practices after divine punishment—lion attacks (2 Kings 17:25–26). Rabbinic texts like Chullin 6a debate whether their conversion was sincere or coerced.
- The Great Schism: By the Second Temple era, Samaritans had split from mainstream Judaism. They built their own temple on Mount Gerizim, rejected Jerusalem’s centrality, and opposed Jewish efforts to rebuild the Second Temple (Ezra 4:1–4). The rift turned bitter: Josephus recounts Samaritan alliances with Rome against Jews (Antiquities 18.2.2), while the Talmud labels them gentiles (Ḥulin 6a).

III. The Samaritan Pentateuch: Rewriting Scripture
Central to Rabbi Eliezer’s accusation is the Samaritan Pentateuch—a Torah text with ~6,000 differences from the Jewish Masoretic version. Two edits stand out:

  1. Deuteronomy 27:4: The Masoretic Text commands building an altar on Mount Ebal, but the Samaritan version swaps this for Mount Gerizim—their sacred site.
  2. Deuteronomy 12:11: The Masoretic Text uses "yivchar" (future tense, “He will choose”) for the place God will select for His name to dwell, implying ongoing divine selection. The Samaritan text alters this to "bachar" (past tense, “He has chosen”), suggesting Mount Gerizim was already chosen, reinforcing their theological claim.
    Archaeology vs. Theology:
  • A 12th-century BCE altar was unearthed on Mount Ebal (Zertal’s excavations, 1980s), aligning with the Masoretic account.
  • No comparable Israelite structure exists on Gerizim from that era, undermining Samaritan claims.

IV. Rabbi Eliezer’s Trap: Resurrection and Flawed Forgery
Rabbi Eliezer’s genius lies in exploiting the Samaritans’ own textual edits against them. Though Sanhedrin 90b never explicitly mentions Gerizim, his charge of forgery (“זִיַּיפְתֶּם תּוֹרַתְכֶם”) assumes the audience’s familiarity with their edits. His deeper point: even their revised Torah inadvertently hints at resurrection.
He cites Numbers 15:31:
- “That soul shall be utterly cut off (הִכָּרֵת תִּכָּרֵת)... their guilt remains upon them (עֲוֹנָהּ בָּהּ).”
- Rabbinic Interpretation:
- “Utterly cut off” = death in this world.
- “Their guilt remains” = punishment in the World to Come.
The Samaritan Blindspot: By focusing on Gerizim, they missed this resurrection clue. For Rabbi Eliezer, their selective editing was like patching one hole in a boat while ignoring others—the Torah’s afterlife logic still “sank” their theology.

V. Legacy of Manufactured Antiquity
The Samaritans’ textual strategy did not end with Deuteronomy. They doubled down by claiming their Torah scrolls—written in paleo-Hebrew script—dated back to Joshua himself. This assertion crumbles under scrutiny:
- Medieval Origins: Scholars like Frank Moore Cross identified linguistic features (e.g., Aramaic influence, vowel notation) in Samaritan manuscripts that align with 10th–12th century CE scribal practices—not the Bronze Age.
- Guarded Secrecy: Samaritans restricted access to their scrolls for centuries, citing sanctity. Modern imaging technology and comparative studies now conclusively debunk their antiquity claims.
Parallels in Replacement Theology:
- The Samaritan playbook—rewriting Scripture to claim primacy—foreshadowed later movements. Early Christians allegorized Torah to support Messianic claims (supersessionism), while Mormons invented “golden plates” to legitimize their texts.
- Even Islamic traditions, like the Slisļat az-Zahab (Chain of Gold), retroactively framed texts as “unchanged” despite documented revisions.
Modern Irony: Today, fewer than 900 Samaritans remain. They still perform the Passover sacrifice on Gerizim (YouTube footage), using scrolls they claim are ancient—yet their survival hinges on a paradox: authenticity manufactured through forgery.

VI. Key Takeaways
- Textual Variants Matter: Manuscript differences (e.g., minim vs. Kutim) can reshape historical debates.
- Fraud as Legacy: The Samaritan edits to Deuteronomy and Joshua inaugurated a pattern of retroactive claims, from medieval scrolls to modern ritual.
- Archaeology vs. Dogma: The Ebal altar physically contradicts Samaritan theology, yet their faith persists—proof that narrative often outlives fact.

Multimedia Links for Note 4:
1. Samaritan Passover Sacrifice: Video of their ritual on Mt. Gerizim
2. Samaritan Scroll: Image of paleo-Hebrew Deuteronomy 27:4 (British Library)
3. Altar on Ebal: Archaeological photos

5. On Cleopatra, see Unraveling a Talmudic Enigma: The Dialogue of Cleopatra and Rabbi Meir

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Discovering the Talmudic Antoninus

Disovering Antoninus: Identifying the Talmudic Emperor as Septimius Severus - A Counter Narrative of Historical Memory Abstract: The enduring enigma of "Antoninus" in the Babylonian Talmud, the close Roman imperial confidante of Rabbi Judah the Prince, has long defied singular historical identification, leading scholars to posit a composite figure drawing from various emperors of the Antonine dynasty. This article challenges that prevailing view, proposing that Septimius Severus (reigned 193–211 CE) served as the singular historical referent for the Talmudic Antoninus, unifying previously disparate narrative threads into a coherent and historically grounded account. Through a critical re-examination of key Talmudic narratives—including the alleged requests for senatorial approval, the cryptic "Gira" story (with its nuanced, bidirectional plant counsel), the strategic "vegetable plucking" metaphor, the discussions on secrecy (underpinned by a pervasive at...
Post a Comment
Read more

Death Came Through My Window

Introduction As we enter this period of national mourning, I feel moved to share a more personal mourning that also takes place during these days. Last year, my father z''l passed away on the 6th of Av, and his first yahrzeit is fast approaching. For my family, this week on the Jewish calendar has long been marked by grief, as my sister a''h died under tragic circumstances on the 3rd of Av many years ago. In this series of three posts, I will reflect on themes relating to mourning and loss, beginning with the eulogy I delivered at my father's funeral. Death Came Through My Window Twenty-one years ago, almost to the day, I stood in this very place, at this same funeral home, to speak some words at my sister’s funeral. I remember how people said then that it was unnatural, for a parent to bury their own child. It was an upside-down world. Now I find myself standing here again, this time as a son burying his father. They say this is the natural order of things, the w...
Post a Comment
Read more

Dama ben Netina: The Hidden Narrative Beyond Filial Piety

Dama ben Netina, a unique non-Jewish figure in rabbinic literature, is celebrated for his extraordinary ethical qualities. His story, recounted in distinct episodes across the Talmud and its commentaries, offers more than simple moral lessons; these narratives subtly pose profound questions about human behavior and meaning. By examining these accounts closely, and particularly a less-known third account, we can unlock a profound and unexpected understanding of his character. The Foundational Narratives: Two Repeated Accounts We begin with two primary episodes featuring Dama ben Netina, found in various rabbinic texts. 1. The Gem for the Ephod (Bavli Kiddushin 31a) The Bavli Kiddushin (31a) records the following incident: The sages sought a precious gem for the High Priest’s ephod, and it was found in Dama’s possession in Ashkelon. They agreed to pay him a large sum for it, either six hundred thousand zuz or eight hundred thousand. However, the key to the chest containing the ...
Post a Comment
Read more