(R. Yochanan to the Rabbis of Bavel): You say two things in the name of Rav that the halacha does not follow...

You say in the name of Rav that they permitted relations with a Yefas To'ar (the beautiful gentile woman who is taken captive in a war - see Devarim 21:10-14) once. But after that, she is only permitted after the things that are listed in the pesukim have been done (namely, bringing her to his house, shaving her head, growing her nails long, switching her clothing and living in his house and crying for her parents for 30 days), as the pasuk states (pasuk 13), "and after this, he will come and have relations with her" - after all of these things were done.

But I (i.e. R. Yochanan) say that they did not even allow the relations for the first time until all of these things have been done, as the pasuk says "and after this, he will come and have relations with her" - only after all of these things were done.

You also say in the name of Rav that Yoav (who was trying to avoid the death penalty by King Shlomo) thought that holding the corners of the altar would save him (because the pasuk says (Shemos 21:14), "When a person will conspire to ambush his comrade in cunning, (even) from My altar you shall take him to die.") He thought that the corners protect him, but in fact, it is the top that protects. He also thought that even the altar in Shilo protects, but it is only the altar of the Beis HaMikdash that protects.

And I (R. Yochanan) say that neither the altar nor its roof, nor the altar in Shilo nor the altar in the Beis HaMikdash protect - only the six Cities of Refuge protect.

Question: Could Yoav, about whom the pasuk refers (Shmuel 2:23:8), "He who sat in the assembly of the wise, the chief of the captains" have made a mistake in this matter?

Answer (R. Tanchuma): He fled to the Sanhedrin, meaning that he took hold of the altar, which does in fact protect from punishment for treason (as he had sided with Avshalom against King David. To punish for treason, the king does not need a trial to be carried out); as he wanted to be judged by the Sanhedrin for killing Avner instead.

Support (Beraisa): If a person is put to death by Beis Din, his estate goes to his inheritors. If he is killed by the king for treason, his property goes to the king. Yoav said, "It is better that I will be killed in Beis Din and my sons will inherit me, rather than the king killing me and my property go to him".

When Shlomo heard this, he said, "Do I need his money?! Immediately, the pasuk states (Melachim 1:2:31), ""and take away the innocent blood" (of Avner who was killed by Yoav) rather than take his money. (Verse 32), "And Benayahu (ben Yehuyada) went up and struck him and killed him and buried him in his house in the desert".

Was the desert his house? Rather, it teaches that once Yoav, the head of the army of Yisrael died, Yisrael became like a desert (barren of the good that Yoav brought to them).

If you say that it is referring to his taking spoils at war and using the money to building beautiful buildings and bathhouses for them, it is in his praise; if you say that he took spoils and use them to feed the Sages and their students, it is the very greatest praise.

From where do we know that the Great Sanhedrin would sit close to the altar? As the pasuk states (Shemos 20:23), "Do not ascend to my altar on steps". And the following pasuk states (Shemos 21:1), "And these are the statutes that you shall put before them". The juxtaposition of the altar and the details of the legal system indicates that the Sanhedrin should sit close to the altar.