More Discussions for this daf
1. Sabatyon 2. Hash-m swearing in anger 3. When is a child Zocheh to Olam ha'Ba
4. Portion in the World to Come 5. Rebbi Akiva's Chesed 6. Achitofel and David ha'Melech
DAF DISCUSSIONS - SANHEDRIN 110

harvey/mechael asked:

below is an excerpt from the point-by-point summary from Sanhedrin 110. In it it describes Hash-m swearing in anger, and then retracting. But aren't there other Chazal's where Hash-m swears and then says Oy, now that I have sworn, who can annul it??

Why the discrepancy??

(a) (Mishnah - R. Akiva): Dor ha'Midbar has no share...

(b) (Beraisa - R. Akiva): Dor ha'Midbar has no share in the world to come - "ba'Midbar ha'Zeh Yitamu" in this world, and "v'Sham Yamusu" in the world to come;

1. It also says "Asher Nishbati v'Api Im Yevo'un El Menuchasi."

(c) R. Eliezer says, they have a share - "Isfu Li Chasidai..."

1. Hash-m "swore in His anger ", then retracted (after His anger passed, and annulled His oath).

harvey/mechael, los angeles- golus ville

The Kollel replies:

What's the problem? The Gemara is not looking for discrepancies. All it wants is to explain how it is that the generation of the Desert receive a portion in Olam ha'Ba, in spite of Hash-m's oath. Even if there are other places where Hash-m rescinded His oath, why should that make any difference?

In fact however, maybe you would like to quote me one other example where Hash-m swore and retracted. On the contrary, Chazal generally say that wherever Hash-m swore, it cannot be rescinded? But that is not what you asked.

The Ben Yehoyada explains how it is conceivable to say that Hash-m retracted from His oath. What the Gemara means, he says, is that Hash-m's oath was contingent upon His anger - meaning that it only applied as long as Yisrael did not do Teshuvah. Once they did, His anger dissipated, and the oath was no longer applicable.

Be'Virchas Kol Tuv

Eliezer Chrysler

Sam Kosofsky asks:

Rebbe,

I can think of at least two places where Hashem retracted as it were. He wanted to make Chizkiyahu Hamelech the Moshiach but the malachim pointed out that Chizkiyahu didn't sing shira after his salvation. It was as if the malachim forced His hand k'vayachol and He retracted.

Yechezkel, (perek 9 posuk 4), was also told a nevua in which the malachim were supposed to put a mark put on the tzaddikim in Yerushalayim who lamented the terrible sins of the time. They would be spared while others wouldn't be. Apparently, (If I remember correctly), they didn't protest enough and Hashem changed His mind if one can say such a thing. These examples were from a good nevuah to a bad one or rather to nullification of the good nevuah.

B'kavod,

Sam Kosofsky

The Kollel replies:

Shalom Rav, Sam. It is good to hear from you again.

Neither of the cases you mention are accompanied by a Shevu'ah, which was the basis of the questioner's inquiry.

Moreover, it seems to me that they were not prophecies either (as Yirmeyahu ha'Navi informed Chananyah, the false prophet); whereas Hashem may change His mind with regard to a negative prophecy, He will never do so with regard to a positive one.

In summary, the first case you mention refers to a Divine intention; the second, to a Divine command (concerning the present, rather than a prophecy concerning the future). Both are subject to retraction, according to the circumstances, as is a negative prophecy; a positive prophecy is not.

b'Virchas Kol Tuv,

Eliezer Chrysler

Harvey/Mechael Benton asks:

How can we say (acc to the Ben Yehoyoda) as below, that Hashem really has anger? Even for ourselves, we are never supposed to have anger (but only portray it, if nec. to impress others who might be behaving.) Wouldn't we say, then, kol she'kein, that Hashem never gets angry????

(Though at times we might "feel" that He is angry at us, and might "feel" the brunt of his Punishment???)

thank you.....

Harvey

The Kollel replies:

We know that Chazal teach us that Hashem Himself is beyond any description (refer to the third of the Rambam's principles of faith), including His Midos. Descriptions such as happy, sad, pleased, and angry are descriptions of human traits, and, as you write, Hashem is not human.

On the other hand, in order to convey to us whether what we do is good or bad, Hashem developed a system which enables us to receive messages from Him so that He can keep us informed of whether we are heading in the right direction or not, and to let us know whether to expect reward or punishment. In order to do this, He portrays Himself as if He was human. Thus the Torah speaks about "the hands of Hashem" (with reference to His actions), "the Eyes of Hashem" (with reference to the fact that He "sees" and knows all that happens), "the pleasant smell to Hashem" that we make when we fulfil His commands (to inform us that we have done the right thing), and His anger when we have done wrong (or His fury, when we have done *very* wrong, to make us aware that we have sinned gravely).

Kol Tuv,

Eliezer Chrysler