Page 95 - Tzurba M'Rabanan Volume1

ןנברמ אברוצ םיוגה תוקוח תוכלה · 93

Now if it truly is a statute, how can we burn items? Is it not ,אלא !וכלת אל םהיתוקוחבו :ביתכהו
written: “You shall not follow their statutes”? Rather it must אלא ,איה הקוח ואל הפירש – ע"כד
be that according to everyone burning isn’t a statute; rather it …איה אתובישח
is a sign of importance of the specific king for them…

According to the conclusion of the Gemara here, both Rabbi Meir and the Rabbis hold that burning items
to mark the death of a king is not considered to be a set practice of the gentiles (and that is why the beraita
permits it), as if it were, it would be forbidden due to chukot hagoyim. Tosafot (in Masechet Sanhedrin and
Masechet Avoda Zara) question why the Gemara here did not explain that burning is not a violation of chukot
5
hagoyim because the practice is mentioned in Tanach, which according to the Gemara in Sanhedrin should
be permitted. Based on this question, Tosafot develop an important principle as to defining the prohibition
of chukot hagoyim.

r Tosafot, Masechet Avoda Zara 11a .אי הרז הדובע | תופסות . 12
Therefore the Ri explained that there are two types of statutes. דחא ווה הקוח ינווג ירתד י"ר שריפ ךכל
One type is where the statute is used for idolatry, and one דחאו םיבכוכ תדובעל קוח םשל ןישועש
is where they practice it for [reasons] of nonsense and folly. םהלש תוטשו לבה תעד םשל ןישועש
And here in our passage [Avoda Zara] it is referring to that [type םישועש קח ותואב יריימ ןיתעמשב אכהו
of] statute that they practice for idol worship, and this is the הפירש רבס מ"ר פ"הו םיבכוכ תדובע םשל
explanation: Rabbi Meir holds that burning is not a statute for idol ךירפ יכהל םיבכוכ תדובעל איה הקוח ואל
worship; therefore it asks: “Now if it truly is a statute, how can we
burn items? Is it not written: “You shall not follow their statutes”?” ןניפרש יכיה ןנא םיבכוכ תדובעל הקוח יאו
And even though it is mentioned in the Torah, it should still בג לע ףאו וכלת אל םהיתוקוחבו ביתכ אהו
be forbidden, since for them it is a statute for idolatry… thus םהלש ןויכ רוסאל שי אתיירואב אביתכד
it [the Gemara] concludes that according to all opinions, it isn’t a אלא קיסמו …םיבכוכ תדובעל קח אוה
statute for idolatry. Nevertheless it is a statute of nonsense and םיבכוכ תדובע םשל איה קוח ואל ע"כד
6
folly. And in the chapter “Arba mitot” (Sanhedrin 52b) it refers תותימ 'ד 'פבו תוטשו לבה קח אוה מ"מו
to a statute due to its significance according to the conclusion םושמ אוה קח יעתשמ ):בנ ףד ןירדהנס(
here [in Avoda Zara]. Therefore, even Rabbi Yehuda agrees that יבר וליפא יכהלו אכהד אנקסמ יפל תובישח
we do not learn it from them [gentiles] if it is written in the Torah, אביתכ יא והיינימ ןנירמג אלד ידומ הדוהי
and it is not considered a statute for idolatry. But certainly if it אוה םיבכוכ תדובעל קח ואלו אתיירואדב
were not written in the Torah, we would not [be allowed] to
practice even their customs of nonsense… אתיירואדב אביתכ הוה אל יא יאדו לבא
…תוטש לש ןגהנמב ףא גהנתהל ונל היה אל

7
In summary, according to Tosafot:
• Activities performed by gentiles as part of their idolatrous ritual are prohibited, even if they are written
in the Torah.

5. See Yirmiyahu 34:5, which is quoted in the continuation of the Gemara Avoda Zara. [Addition of the editors of the English edition]
6. Therefore, if it is written in the Torah, it is permitted, but if it is not written in the Torah, it is forbidden. [Addition of the editors of the English edition]
7. The manner in which Tosafot explain the two passages in the Gemara is a bit complex. In short, the sugya in Avoda Zara holds that burning for
kings when performed for purposes of idolatry would be considered a statute for idolatry, and therefore forbidden despite being mentioned in the
Torah. Therefore, the Gemara does not suggest that, but rather concludes that burning is instead a sign of importance. In that case, it is still considered
a nonsensical statute, but is permitted specifically because it is mentioned in the Torah. The Gemara in Sanhedrin is referring to this type of statute,
which is a sign of importance (and nonsensical, but not idolatrous) and therefore says it is only forbidden if it is not mentioned in the Torah.

This volume is not to be distributed. Copies are for the personal use of purchaser only.