Suggestion: Tana'im argue about Rav Yehudah's law.

(Beraisa - R. Yehudah): If one slaughtered a grasshopper in front of (Rashi - any idolatry; Tosfos - an idolatry to which grasshoppers are offered), he is liable;

Chachamim exempt.

Suggestion: R. Yehudah obligates because this resembles slaughter. Likewise, he would obligate for breaking a stick. Chachamim say that this only slightly resembles slaughter, and one is liable only for what truly resembles Avodas Penim.

Rejection: No, all agree that one is liable only for what truly resembles Avodas Penim (unlike Rav Yehudah);

R. Yehudah obligates for a grasshopper, for its neck resembles that of an animal (but if one breaks a stick, he is exempt).

(Rav Nachman citing Rabah bar Avuha): An idolatry that is served with a stick:

If one breaks a stick in front of it, he is Chayav Misah and the stick is forbidden;

If he threw a stick in front of it (and it is normally served this way), he is liable and the stick is permitted.

Question (Ravina): Breaking a stick forbids the stick, for this is like slaughter. Also throwing is like Zerikah!

Answer (Rav Nachman): Only throwing something that splits up forbids the article.

Question (Rava): If so, why do stones thrown to Markulis become forbidden?

Answer (Rav Nachman citing Rav): They are like additions to Markulis. They are forbidden like idolatry.

Question: This is like the opinion that idolatry of a Nochri is forbidden even before it is worshipped;

According to the opinion that idolatry of a Nochri is not forbidden until it is worshipped, it should be permitted!

Answer #1: When the next rock was thrown, this is an act of Avodah to all the previous rocks.

Question (Rava): If so, the last rock thrown should be permitted!

Answer (Rav Nachman): Yes, but you do not know which was thrown last, so all are forbidden.

Answer #2 (Rav Ashi): When each rock is thrown, this is Avodah to itself and all the previous rocks, so even it becomes forbidden.

(Mishnah): If garments, coins or Kelim were found on idolatry, they are permitted;

If grape clusters, wreaths of ears (of grain), wine, oil, fine flour, or anything offered in the Mikdash was found on it, they are forbidden.

Question: We understand why wine, oil, and fine flour are forbidden. They are brought in the Mikdash, and when thrown they split up;

However, grape clusters and wreaths of ears are not brought in the Mikdash, and when thrown they do not split up. They should be permitted!

Answer (Rava): The case is, from the beginning they were harvested to be offered to idolatry (therefore, the harvesting is Avodah. It is like throwing that splits up).

Question (R. Yochanan): What is the source to exempt one who slaughters a Ba'al Mum (blemished animal) to idolatry?

Answer (R. Yochanan): "Zove'ach la'Elokim Yocharam Bilti la'Shem Levado" - the Torah forbids only Avodah like that in the Mikdash.

Question (Rava): To what kind of Mum does he refer?

Suggestion: He refers to a film in the eye.

Rejection: A Nochri may offer such an animal to Hash-m on a Bamah (private altar), and all the more so he is liable for offering it to idolatry!

Answer: Rather, he discusses an animal missing a limb.

Question (R. Elazar): What is the source that a Nochri may not offer (to Hash-m) an animal missing a limb?

Answer (R. Elazar): "Umi'Kol ha'Chai" - its extremal limbs must be Chayim (intact).

Question: That verse is needed to exclude a Treifah!

Answer: We exclude a Treifah from "Lechayos Zera."

Question: This is like the opinion that a Treifah cannot reproduce;

According to the opinion that a Treifah can reproduce, how can we answer?

Answer: "Itecha" - the animals should resemble you (Noach, who was not (visibly) a Treifah).

Question: Perhaps Noach was a Treifah!

Answer #1: This cannot be. The Torah calls him "Tamim."

Question: Perhaps it means that he was Tamim (pure) in his ways!

Answer: We already know this, for he is called a Tzadik.

Question: Perhaps it means that he was Tamim in his ways and Tzadik in his deeds!

Answer #2: The Torah would not say "Itecha" to teach that he should bring specifically animals that are Treifah!

Question: Since "Itecha" excludes a Treifah, what do we learn from "Lechayos Zera"?

Answer: Had it said only "Itecha", one might have thought that the animals are merely for company. If so, sterilized or old animals unable to reproduce would be acceptable. (Treifos are excluded, for they will die soon;)

"Lechayos Zera" teaches that they must be able to reproduce.

Question (R. Elazar): What is the source that one who slaughters an animal to Markulis is Chayav Misah?

Answer (R. Elazar): "V'Lo Yizbechu Od Es Zivcheihem la'Se'irim";

We do not need it to teach about the normal Avodah of Markulis, which we learn from "Eichah Ya'avdu... Es Eloheihem", so we use it to teach about (Avodas Penim that is) not its normal Avodah.

Question: "V'Lo Yizbechu Od" teaches a different law!

(Beraisa): "V'Lo Yizbechu" teaches about Korbanos that were Hukdash and offered (outside the Mikdash) when one may not offer on a Bamah (e.g. after the Mishkan was built).

Question: "V'El Pesach Ohel Mo'ed Lo Hevi'o (he gets Kares)" - where does the Torah warn not to slaughter Korbanos outside the Mikdash?

Answer: It says "Pen Ta'aleh Olosecha";

(R. Avin): Wherever it says 'Hishamer', 'Pen' or 'Al', this is a Lav.

The continuation of the verse discusses Korbanos that were Hukdash when it was permitted to offer on a Bamah and were offered (outside the Mikdash) after this became forbidden - "Lema'an Asher Yavi'u... Asher Hem Zovechim" - they were permitted before;

"Al Penei ha'Sadeh" - whoever slaughters on a Bamah when it is forbidden is like one who slaughters to idolatry;

"Ve'Hevi'um la'Shem" is an Aseh;

We learn a Lav from "v'Lo Yizbechu Od Es Zivcheihem."

Suggestion: Perhaps one is Chayav Kares for this!

Rejection: "Chukas Olam Tihyeh Zos Lahem" - only this (when it was Hukdash when Bamos are forbidden) is Chayav Kares.

Answer (Rava): We read the verse as if it said 'v'Lo Yizbechu v'Lo Od', to teach this Lav and a Lav against Avodas Penim to idolatry.

(Mishnah): If garments, coins or Kelim were found on idolatry, they are permitted;

If grape clusters, wreaths of ears, wine, oil, fine flour, or anything offered in the Mikdash was found on it, it is forbidden.

(Gemara) Question: What is the source of this?

Answer (R. Chiya bar Yosef) Contradiction: It says "Shikutzeihem... Etz va'Even Kesef v'Zahav Asher Imahem (with them)", and it says "Lo Sachmod Kesef v'Zahav Aleihem (on them)"!

Answer: What is with, i.e. near idolatry, is like what is on it;

The Torah forbids only gold and silver on it, i.e. Noy (things that beautify it). Likewise, only Noy near it is forbidden!

Question: Perhaps we should expound 'what is on it is like what is near it';

The Torah forbids only everything near it, even rocks and wood, which are not (normally) Noy. Likewise, things on it, even not for Noy, are forbidden!

Answer: If so, the Torah could have omitted "Lo Sachmod Kesef v'Zahav Aleihem"! (Since it taught that everything near it is forbidden, and all the more so everything on it is forbidden.)

Question: Coins are Noy. Why does the Mishnah permit them?

Answer (d'Vei R. Yanai): They are in a bag tied around the idol's neck (they are not Noy).

Question: Garments are Noy. Why does the Mishnah permit them?

Answer (d'Vei R. Yanai): They are folded and placed on the idol's head (they are not Noy).

Question: Kelim are Noy. Why does the Mishnah permit them?

Answer (d'Vei R. Yanai): A wash basin is hanging on its head (it is not Noy).

(Rav Asi bar Chiya): Whatever is inside the curtain (around the idolatry) is forbidden, even water or salt (which are not for Noy, but they are Takroves, for they are offered in the Mikdash);

Outside the curtain, only articles of Noy are forbidden (Rashi - from the above verse "Etz v'aEven... Asher Imahem"; Tosfos - it is Takroves).

(R. Yosi bar Chanina): The Halachah is, curtains do not apply to Ba'al Pe'or or Markulis.

Question: What is their law?

Suggestion: Even within the curtains is considered outside, only articles of Noy are forbidden.

Rejection: Excreting in front of Pe'or is its Avodah. Can we say that water or salt is not Takroves?!

Answer: Even outside the curtains is considered inside. Even things that are not Noy are forbidden.

(Mishnah): If there is a bathhouse or garden of idolatry, one may benefit from it only if he does not give benefit;

If it belonged to idolatry and others, one may benefit, and he may give or (Maharsha - and) not give benefit.

Idolatry of a Nochri is forbidden immediately. Idolatry of a Yisrael is permitted until it is worshipped.

Version #1 (Gemara - Abaye): The Mishnah forbids benefiting the priests of the idolatry;

One may benefit commoners who serve it.

Version #2 (Abaye): The Seifa says, if it belonged to idolatry and others, one may benefit, and he may give and not give benefit. I.e. he may benefit the others, but he may not benefit the priests.

Version #2 certainly agrees to the law of Version #1. If one may not benefit the priests even though they are not the sole owners, and all the more so when they are the sole owners!

Version #1 argues with the law of Version #2. If one may not benefit the priests only if they are the sole owners, when they are not the sole owners, it is permitted.

(Mishnah): Idolatry of a Nochri is forbidden immediately, idolatry of a Yisrael is permitted until it is worshipped.

Our Mishnah is like R. Akiva.

(Beraisa - R. Yishmael): "Abed Te'abdun Es Kol ha'Mekomos Asher Avdu Sham ha'Goyim" refers to Kelim used to serve idolatry.

Suggestion: Perhaps the Kelim are forbidden if they were made (for idolatry) but not yet finished, if they were finished but not yet brought to the idolatry, or if they were brought but not yet used to serve.

Rejection: "Asher Avdu" - they are not forbidden until they are used to serve;

This teaches that idolatry of a Nochri is not forbidden until it is Ne'evad. Idolatry of a Yisrael is forbidden immediately.

R. Akiva says, just the contrary! Idolatry of a Nochri is forbidden immediately. Idolatry of a Yisrael is permitted until it is worshipped.