Avoda Zara Daf 41 - Tzelamim
Summary
- This shiur opens with context, thanks, and dedications, then outlines the sugya in Avodah Zarah 41–42 about which statues are prohibited in benefit, how to identify a statue as deity versus decoration, and the status of broken statues and broken avodah zarah. The Gemara presents Rabbi Meir’s view that all images are prohibited because they are worshipped once a year, and the Chachamim’s criteria that only images holding specific symbols are prohibited, with Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel extending that to anything in the hand. The sugya details which types and placements of statues fall under prohibition, explicates symbolic items that mark deity-status, and treats whether broken pieces are permitted, including distinctions between a mere statue and known avodah zarah. The Amoraim then debate avodah zarah that breaks on its own and analyze whether a safek heter can remove a vadai issur, testing the principle through proofs and resolutions, and concluding with nuanced applications of chazakah and layered doubts.
- The shiur notes that today’s daf centers on Avodah Zarah 41–42 at the beginning of the third perek, with thanks to Rabbi Wechselbaum and Michael Gevirtz for delivering shiurim during the presenter’s absence and apologies for a missed session due to flight delays. The session is sponsored by Dr. David Lander in honor of his family and l’iluy nishmat Golda bat Simcha, a”h, and by Jeremy Lustman in honor of Dr. Mark Lustman’s completion of Shas via Rav Shmuel Silver’s Daf Yomi shiur in Baltimore, with a blessing for continued learning for him and his descendants.
- The perek is grounded in pesukim: פסילי אלוהיהם תשרפון באש, ולא תביא תועבה אל ביתך והיית חרם כמוהו, and לא ידבק בידך מאומה מן החרם. The Gemara in Makkot 22 learns from these verses that avodah zarah is prohibited in benefit, and the Rambam in Hilchot Avodah Zarah 7 rules that one who derives benefit from avodah zarah incurs two sets of lashes for violating two distinct prohibitions.
- The Mishnah presents: כל הצלמים אסורים מפני שהן נעבדין פעם אחת בשנה דברי רבי מאיר, וחכמים אומרים אינו אסור אלא כל שיש בידו מקל או ציפור או כדור, and Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel adds אף כל שיש בידו כל דבר. The Taz (YD 141) defines a *tzelem* as a crafted image resembling a human or other forms; the Sefer HaEshkol and Ra’avyah limit this to full statuary rather than coinage images; the Meiri, Bach, and Perisha read it as specifically פרצוף אדם, with the Perisha and Beit Yosef adducing כי בצלם אלהים עשה and inferring even a full human body, while the Taz and Shach equate human and other forms if they are worshipped. The Rambam (Hilchot Avodah Zarah 7) and Shulchan Aruch rule that any form made for worship is prohibited without limiting to human form, and the shiur repeatedly contrasts a mere *tzelem* (uncertainly worshipped) with actual *avodah zarah* (certainly worshipped). The Rambam explains the “once a year” worship as tied to a specific solar alignment that allegedly unlocks the image’s power, whereas the Meiri attributes it to an annual festival for the primary deity during which they worship other images as well.
- The Gemara clarifies that Rabbi Meir’s community had a practice of annual worship of images, and because Rabbi Meir is choshesh lemi’uta, he prohibited similar cases elsewhere to prevent leniency where he lived, while the *Chachamim* did not extend such gezeirot. Abaye in the name of Shmuel specifies that Rabbi Meir’s prohibition targets statues honoring beloved deceased kings (אנדרטי של מלכים) that people might worship, and Rav Chana in the name of Rabbi Yochanan adds images positioned at a city entrance as especially significant and thus suspect. Rabbah distinguishes locales, concluding that the dispute concerns statues in large cities in Rabbi Meir’s region, with village statues being prohibited by all due to their devotional function, while big-city statues elsewhere may be decorative and permitted according to the Chachamim.
- The Mishnah’s indicators signal cosmic dominion: a staff symbolizes ruling the world with force, a bird symbolizes grasping the world like one seizes a bird, and a sphere symbolizes the globe. Tosafot notes that the world is round (שהעולם עגול), citing the Yerushalmi that אלכסנדרוס מוקדון viewed the earth as a sphere from above. A baraita adds a sword, crown, and signet ring; the sugya records initial leniencies (bandit, mere headgear, messenger’s ring) and final stringencies (power to kill the world, royal crown indicating universal kingship, power to seal decrees of death over the world). Rabbeinu Tam situates Shmuel’s “אנדרטי” within the Chachamim, with the Ritva explaining that added items also convey the honoree’s might and wealth even if not of royal lineage.
- Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel asserts that anything in the statue’s hand indicates worship, and a baraita includes even a clod of earth or a splinter. Rav Ashi inquires about excrement, weighing whether it symbolizes the world’s insignificance before the deity or demeans the figure itself, and the Gemara leaves the question unresolved with teiku.
- The Mishnah rules that one who finds broken images (*shivrei tzelamim*) may benefit from them due to compounded doubt: perhaps the *tzelem* was never worshipped, and even if it was, perhaps a gentile was mevatel it. It nevertheless prohibits a full-form hand or foot because such limb-images are themselves worshipped, and Tosafot questions Rashi’s earlier limitation to images at city gates based on this case being found in the marketplace or field. Shmuel states that even broken avodah zarah is permitted, and the Mishnah’s focus on broken images aims to teach that a full-form hand or foot is prohibited even when detached from a mere *tzelem*, while the prohibition is stronger when taken from known avodah zarah. Shmuel further qualifies that the Mishnah’s prohibited hand or foot refers to those mounted on their base, signaling continued reverence.
- Rabbi Yochanan rules that avodah zarah that broke on its own remains prohibited because no act of bitul occurred, while Reish Lakish permits it because the gentile will dismiss a powerless idol with the logic “if it cannot save itself, it will not save me.” Rabbi Yochanan challenges Reish Lakish from the Dagon episode, and Reish Lakish answers that the worship shifted from Dagon to the threshold where its parts fell. Rabbi Yochanan then challenges from the Mishnah on broken images, and the Gemara answers that the Mishnah follows Rabbi Meir that a whole *tzelem* is prohibited while broken is permitted, and that does not prove the status of known avodah zarah because the latter is a vadai issur with only a single safek of bitul. The sugya articulates that a safek heter does not remove a vadai issur in this context, distinguishing a double doubt about *tzelamim* from a single doubt about known avodah zarah.
- The Gemara tests whether a safek heter can resolve a vadai issur from the case of a chaver who died and left a storehouse of produce, which is presumed tithed even if newly finished. The sugya answers that this is not a safek versus vadai but either a vadai-vadai via the chazakah that a chaver never releases untithed produce (as taught by Rabbi Chanina Choza’ah) or a safek-safek because the grain may never have achieved real tevel if handled as Rav Hoshaya permits. The sugya thereby preserves Rabbi Yochanan’s principle that a single safek does not uproot a vadai issur for avodah zarah that was certainly worshipped. The session closes by signaling a forthcoming second proof regarding the rule of safek motzi midei vadai.
Previous Page
Next Page
Daf Images are property of Vagshal and may not be reproduced.
Suggestions