We continue in chapter seven of Tractate Sanhedrin, with Mishnah ten. The Mishnah continues to detail the transgressions listed earlier in Mishnah four, whose punishment is stoning, and now it addresses the meisit (enticer) and the madiach (subverter).
The meisit is a Jew who entices another Jew to engage in idol worship. As we saw in the previous mishnayos, idol worship is performed in one of three ways: accepting an idol as a god, worshipping it in its customary manner, or worshipping it through one of the four services used to worship Hashem. The very act of enticing someone to do one of these is the definition of the transgression of enticing (hasatah).
The enticement itself makes one liable, regardless of whether the enticed person actually committed the act or not, as it is stated: "Uskalto ba'avanim vameis... ki bikesh lehadichacha me'al Hashem Elokecha" - "And you shall stone him with stones, and he shall die... because he sought to turn you away from Hashem your God". The very request - the intention and attempt to distance a person from Hashem - is the transgression itself.
The difference between a meisit and a madiach:
The meisit entices individuals, whereas the madiach subverts the majority of the residents of a city to idolatry. First we will address the meisit, which is the main focus of our mishnah.
"Hameisit zeh hedyot hameisit es hahedyot" - The enticer is an ordinary person who entices an ordinary person:
A hedyot is an ordinary person, as opposed to a false prophet. In general, the term 'hedyot' is a relative term, describing someone who is not distinguished in a certain respect. Here, it means that a false prophet, who claims that Hashem commanded him to worship this idol, falls into a different category: according to our Tanna, Rabbi Shimon, his punishment is not stoning but strangulation. And the words "who entices an ordinary person" teach that this refers to enticing individuals, in contrast to an entire city, which is judged as a madiach.
It is worth noting that our Tanna's view is not the accepted halachah. The halachah is that one who entices to idolatry is stoned regardless of whether he enticed in the name of Hashem as a false prophet or in another way, and also that both of them - the meisit and the madiach - are judged with stoning. Thus, this mishnah, which was taught by Rabbi Shimon, does not accord with the opinion of the Sages and is not the halachah in these two details.
What enticement looks like:
The mishnah describes the act of persuasion: "Amar lo, yesh yirah bemakom peloni, kach ocheles, kach shosah, kach meitivah, kach merei'ah" - He said to him, "There is an object of reverence in such and such a place, thus it eats, thus it drinks, thus it does good, thus it does harm":
"Yesh yirah bemakom peloni" - There is an idol in another place.
"Kach ocheles, kach shosah" - This is its food and this is its drink.
"Kach meitivah" - These are the benefits it grants its worshippers.
"Kach merei'ah" - These are the negative consequences of abstaining from its worship.
We must understand the role of this line in the mishnah, since describing an idol, and even making claims about its virtues, is not the prohibition we are dealing with, and certainly does not incur liability for stoning. The prohibition of enticement and liability for stoning require actual enticement, a call to action to worship the idol or accept it, and this has not yet been stated here. The Gemara teaches that this provides insight into the meisit's method of operation: people are familiar with the residents of their own place and their strange customs, therefore the meisit specifically begins by describing a distant and unfamiliar place, where they practice such and such and it benefits them - and since the enticed person is not familiar with these things, it is easier to entrap him.
A Meisit Does Not Need a Full Warning:
For all other punishable offenses, the beis din requires witnesses and a warning. The major exception to this rule is found in our Mishnah: a meisit (one who entices others to idol worship) does not need to receive a formal warning, in which the consequences of his actions are made clear to him, in order to be liable for his enticement. The basis for this law is the wording of the verse: "Velo tachmol velo techaseh alav" - you shall not pity the meisit and you shall not cover up for him. In other words, we are inclined and ready to convict him, and therefore a full warning is not required. Nevertheless, as the Mishnah will explain later, a minor warning is required, a sort of warning light, giving him one last chance.
"Kol chayavei misos shabatorah ein machminin aleihen, chutz mizo":
For all others liable to the death penalty, we do not set a trap for someone who is about to sin: we do not place hidden witnesses to eavesdrop on him or spy on him, and we do not place bait before him to catch him in the act. The exception is the meisit, for whom we are willing to hide witnesses to listen to his words, in order to ultimately bring about his conviction.
"Amar lishnayim - vehen edav" - if the meisit enticed two people at once, those two who heard the enticement serve as witnesses themselves, and even though a full warning was not given (apart from the minor warning we will describe), "mevi'in oso leveis din vesoklin oso" - those two who were enticed bring the meisit to beis din and execute the penalty of stoning upon him.
"Amar le'echad" - if the meisit is clever and speaks with only one person at a time, so that there will not be two witnesses against him at once, the enticed person must say to him: "Yeish li chaverim rotzim bekach" - I have friends who are interested in this. This is a trap designed to get the meisit to speak in front of two people at the same time, so that there will be testimony to bring him to beis din.
"Im hayah arum ve'eino yachol ledabeir bifneihem" - if the meisit is clever and knows that speaking in front of two people at once is dangerous for him, and comes up with an excuse as to why he cannot speak in front of them but only with one person at a time, then "machminin lo eidim achorei hagader" - we place two witnesses in an ambush behind the fence, so that they will be the ones to convict him. "Vehu omer lo: emor mah she'amarta li beyichud" - the enticed person asks the meisit to repeat what he said to him when they were alone, so that the witnesses will hear it firsthand.
It is worth noting: witnesses do not fulfill their obligation through hearing alone, but must see with their own eyes. This means that eavesdropping is not enough; rather, they must peek through a hole in the wall and actually see the enticement to idol worship, while of course hearing it with their own ears. Why are two witnesses required behind the fence, and why is one hidden witness not enough to join together with the enticed person? Because there is a rule regarding testimony that the witnesses must be able to see each other. Since the hidden witness cannot be seen by the enticed person, they do not combine to form a single set of witnesses, and therefore two hidden witnesses are required in secret.
The Warning Light and the Last Chance:
"Vehalah omer lo" - the meisit repeats his words and entices him to go and worship the idol. "Vehu omer lo: he'ach naniach es Elokeinu shebashamayim veneileich vena'avod eitzim va'avanim" - here the enticed person must respond to the meisit. This is not a full warning, whose standard formula is that it is forbidden to do so and that the beis din will punish him with death for his action, but rather a milder version of it. The same applies in the previous case, where we did not hide witnesses but the meisit initially approached two people - there too, the enticed persons must give this response.
"Im chozeir bo - harei zeh mutav" - this is the meisit's last chance to back down. This backing down can happen in two ways: either he explicitly admits that this should not be done, or he remains silent and does not insist on continuing to entice. In either of these cases, he has not crossed the point of no return, and he is not executed for his actions.
But if he persists in any way and says, "No, this is our obligation," or "It will be good for us," thereby making it clear once again that he is a meisit and is pushing for action - there is no going back. At this point he has crossed the line and is legally a meisit, and just as any subsequent repentance is noble but does not cancel the punishment of the beis din, so too here. Once he is given his last chance with the argument, "How can we abandon our G-d in heaven," and he stands his ground, the two witnesses jump from their ambush, bring him to beis din, and stone him.
The Line Crossed - A Call to Action:
The multiplicity of expressions in the Mishnah is simply detailing a single principle: the boundary that the meisis (inciter) must cross in order to be liable is the call to action. He must tell the incited person to perform an act of idol worship, and this act is divided into three categories:
Worshipping the idol in its normal manner of worship - such as Baal Pe'or, whose manner of worship is by defecating in front of it.
Worshipping it with one of the four services through which Hashem is worshipped, even if this is not its normal manner of worship: slaughtering, burning incense, pouring libations, and bowing down.
Accepting the false idol as a god, even without a physical act.
From here on, the Mishnah brings examples of cases where the boundary is crossed, all built on the same structure: "Eilech ve'e'evod, neilech vena'avod" - meaning I will do it and you will come after me, or that we will do it together. The main point is the instruction to the incited person to perform the act as well. And similarly regarding all four services: "Eilech ve'ezbach, neilech venizbach" - I will go and slaughter, let us go and slaughter, "Eilech ve'aktir, neilech venaktir" - I will go and burn incense, let us go and burn incense, "Eilech ve'anasech, neilech nenasech" - I will go and pour libations, let us go and pour libations, "Eilech ve'eshtachaveh, neilech venishtachaveh" - I will go and bow down, let us go and bow down. In all these cases the boundary is crossed, and if that light warning preceded it, he is liable to stoning.
The Madiach:
The difference with a madiach (instigator) is that he does not approach individuals, but rather an entire city, and seeks to bring all its residents to worship idols. Once he says to the majority of the city's people, "Neilech vena'avod avodah zarah" - let us go and worship idols - he is a madiach.
The Practical Halachah:
We rule that both the meisis and the madiach are judged with stoning, and the same rules that apply to the meisis apply to the madiach as well. The only difference relates to a situation where the city listened to the madiach and became an ir hanidachas (a subverted city), where the majority of its residents worshipped idols: there, other laws apply, such that the entire city is burned with all its contents and it is forbidden to rebuild it. But regarding the consequences for the meisis and the madiach themselves, the law is identical.