Pt2 To Kill or Not to Kill: Scorpions, Snakes, and Other Dangerous Creatures on Shabbat (Shabbat 121b)
This is the second and final part of a two-part series. First part here.
A Providential Encounter: Indications for Miraculous Survival from Snakes and Scorpions
A baraita discusses a situation where a person encounters (נזדמנו) snakes and scorpions. If the person kills them, it indicates that these creatures appeared for the purpose of being killed. However, if the person does not kill them, it suggests that they appeared with the intention to kill the person, but a miracle saved him.
תנו רבנן:
נזדמנו לו נחשים ועקרבים,
הרגן — בידוע שנזדמנו לו להורגן.
לא הרגן — בידוע שנזדמנו להורגו, ונעשה לו נס מן השמים.
[...]
The Sages taught in a baraita:
One who snakes and scorpions happened before him,
if he killed them, it is clear that they happened before him in order for him to kill them.
If he did not kill them it is clear that they happened before him in order for them to kill him, but a miracle from heaven transpired for him and he was saved.
[...]
A Snake in the Study Hall: The “Niyoti” Rescuer and Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi's Sarcasm
In this passage, R' Abba bar Kahana recounts an incident where a snake entered the study hall on Shabbat. A “Niyoti” 1 stood up and killed the snake. In response, R' Yehuda HaNasi sarcastically commented that "one of its type" (implying another snake or something similarly dangerous) killed it, implying a derogatory view of the “Niyoti”.
אמר רבי אבא בר כהנא:
פעם אחת, נפל אחד בבית המדרש,
ועמד ניותי אחד והרגו.
אמר רבי: פגע בו כיוצא בו!
[...]
R' Abba bar Kahana said:
One time, a snake fell into the study hall on Shabbat,
and a Nabatean [Nivati] stood and killed it.
R' Yehuda HaNasi said: One of its type killed it.
[...]
Permissibility of Killing Dangerous Creatures on Shabbat: A Discussion in R' Yannai's Courtyard
R' Abba, son of R' Ḥiyya bar Abba (רבי אבא בריה דרבי חייא בר אבא), and R' Zeira, while sitting in R' Yannai’s courtyard,2 raised a question about the permissibility of killing snakes and scorpions on Shabbat. R' Yannai responded that if he would kill a hornet,3 which is less dangerous, then killing a snake or a scorpion, which are more dangerous, is certainly permitted.
רבי אבא בריה דרבי חייא בר אבא, ורבי זירא, הוו יתבי אקילעא דבי רבי ינאי.
נפק מילתא מבינייהו, בעו מיניה מרבי ינאי: מהו להרוג נחשים ועקרבים בשבת?
אמר להו: צירעה אני הורג, נחש ועקרב — לא כל שכן?!
[...]
R' Abba, son of R' Ḥiyya bar Abba, and R' Zeira, who were sitting in the courtyard of R' Yannai’s house.
A matter emerged from among them, and they raised a dilemma before R' Yannai: What is the ruling with regard to killing snakes and scorpions on Shabbat?
He said to them: I would kill a hornet, all the more so would I kill a snake or a scorpion, as they are more dangerous and it is permitted to kill them.
[...]
Trampling Harmful Objects on Shabbat: Views of Rav Yehuda, Rav Sheshet, and Rav Ketina
Rav Yehuda, Rav Sheshet, and Rav Ketina (רב קטינא) each discussed different cases where one may trample something potentially harmful on Shabbat “innocently”:4 Rav Yehuda mentioned spit (רוק), Rav Sheshet mentioned a snake, and Rav Ketina mentioned a scorpion.
אמר רב יהודה: רוק דורסו לפי תומו.
ואמר רב ששת: נחש דורסו לפי תומו.
ואמר רב קטינא: עקרב דורסו לפי תומו.
Rav Yehuda said: With regard to spittle on Shabbat, one may trample it innocently and need not be concerned about the prohibitions of smoothing or leveling holes.
And Rav Sheshet said: With regard to a snake, one may trample it innocently.
And Rav Ketina said: With regard to a scorpion, one may trample it innocently.
Abba bar Manyomi: An Indebted Torah Scholar's Stressful Brush With the Exilarch’s Household
The Talmud recounts a story about Abba bar Marta, also known as Abba bar Manyomi, who owed money to the household of the Exilarch. On Shabbat, they brought him to the Exilarch's house and tormented (מצערי) him to force payment.5
When spit was found on the floor, the Exilarch instructed his household to cover it with a vessel to prevent people from stepping on it. Abba bar Manyomi informed them that according to Rav Yehuda, it is permissible to trample spittle innocently. Recognizing him as a Torah scholar (צורבא מרבנן), the Exilarch told his household to leave Abba bar Manyomi alone.
אבא בר מרתא, דהוא אבא בר מניומי, הוו מסקי ביה דבי ריש גלותא זוזי.
אייתיוה, קא מצערי ליה.
הוה שדי רוקא.
אמר להו ריש גלותא: אייתו מאנא סחיפו עלויה,
אמר להו: לא צריכיתו,
הכי אמר רבי יהודה: רוק דורסו לפי תומו.
אמר להו: צורבא מרבנן הוא, שבקוה.
The Gemara relates: Abba bar Marta, who is Abba bar Manyomi, owed money to members of the Exilarch’s household.
They brought him to the house of the Exilarch on Shabbat and they tormented him to force him to pay.
There was spittle there.
The Exilarch said to the members of his household: Bring me a vessel and place it over the spittle so that people will not step on it.
Abba bar Manyomi said to them: You need not do so,
as Rav Yehuda said as follows: With regard to spittle, one may trample it innocently.
The Exilarch said to the members of his household: He is a Torah scholar, leave him alone.
צירעה - mentioned also earlier in the sugya (pt1) in a baraita, as being especially dangerous in Ninveh.
לפי תומו - meaning: the trampling is done in a way that is not intentional, deliberate or with specific intent to kill or harm, but rather as a natural or incidental action. A good technical legal analog for "לפי תומו" in this context might be "incidental conduct" or "unintentional act".
In legal terms, this would refer to an action performed without specific intent or premeditation, often considered as not carrying liability because the action was not deliberate.
This is one of the places where this term is used not in the context of מסיח לפי תומו, see all examples here. For another example, see Sanhedrin.39b.9:
(מלכים א כב, לד) ואיש משך בקשת לתומו ויכה
ר' אלעזר אמר לפי תומו
The verse describing the death of Ahab states: “And a certain man drew a bow offhandedly [letummo] and smote the king of Israel” (I Kings 22:34).
R’ Elazar says: “Letummo” should be understood as offhandedly [lefi tummo], without aiming for Ahab.
For a similar story of the Exilarch’s household’s violence, see my previous pieces on Rav Sheshet and Rav Amram the Hasid; and on Eliezer the Small.
For a similar story (or maybe part of the same incident) to the one here, where Abba bar Marta borrowed money from the Exilarch, and couldn’t repay, see Yevamot.120a.11:
אבא בר מרתא, דהוא אבא בר מניומי, הוה מסקי ביה דבי רישא גלותא זוזי.
אייתי קירא, דבק בבלייתא, דבק באפותיה.
חלף קמייהו, ולא בשקרוה.
The Gemara relates that Abba bar Marta, who is also known as Abba bar Minyumi, had been loaned money by members of the Exilarch’s house.
Since he did not want to be seen by these violent people, he brought wax [kira], stuck it to a strip of worn-out fabric, and stuck all of that to his forehead in order to alter his appearance.
He passed before them and they did not recognize him [beshakru]. This shows how much a person’s face changes when the appearance of his forehead is altered.
For more on facial recognition in the Talmud, see my previous piece here.