August 7, 2026 Categories: Halacha & Hashkafa / Torah
Daf Yomi
Hashem’s Holy Name
“…That A Gentile May Bring Either Votive or Freewill Offerings…”
(Menachos 73b)
Rabbi Akiva on our daf derives from the pasuk in Parshas Emor (Vayikra 22:18), “Ish ish mibeis Yisrael u’min ha’ger b’Yisrael asher yakriv korbano l’chol nidreihem u’l’chol nidveihem…” – A man, any man of the house of Israel and of the proselytes among Israel who will bring his offering for any of their vows or their freewill offerings – that not only may a Jew pledge an offering for sacrifice in the Temple, but a gentile may do so as well.
Not Bound
Tosafos (Nazir 16b, sv “hanicha l’man d’amar”) indicates that a gentile’s vow is not halachically binding because the prohibition in Parshas Matos (Bamidbar 30:3), “Lo yachel d’varo” – he shall not desecrate his word – is not included in the seven Noahide laws. The point is that he may indeed consecrate an offering which will be placed on the altar, but he is not held accountable in the event he defaults.Acceptability for the Altar
We find as well (Avodah Zara 5b) that R. Elazar derives from the pasuk in Parshas Noach (Bereishis 6:19), “U’mi’kol ha’chai mi’kol basar shenayim mi’kol tavi el ha’teivah” – And from all that lives, of all flesh, two of each shall you bring into the Ark – that the animals that were to be offered up from these were to be whole, not missing any limbs. He explains that the Torah is saying, “Bring such animals whose principal limbs are living [i.e., whole].” Tosafos (Avodah Zara 5b, 2nd sv “minayin l’mechusar ever…”) note here as well that we cannot say that a gentile who offered up a sacrifice that is missing a limb has transgressed, since here too there is no such prohibition included in the seven Noahide laws. Rather, by so doing – offering a mechusar ever – he has not fulfilled his pledge. Therefore, even though he has not committed any transgression in bringing such an offering, he must offer another sacrifice in place of the first one. Further, Tosafos explain that even though the seven Noahide laws include only prohibitions, from the pasuk in Parshas Emor that Rabbi Akiva cites, we can derive positive obligations. Therefore, a gentile may bring a sacrifice, and for him to do so, it must be one that meets the proper criteria for acceptance on the altar.Oaths Before Matan Torah
Mishna LaMelech (to Rambam Hilchos Melachim 10:7) asks if a gentile is not halachically bound by his vow, as Tosafos state (Nazir, cited above), then what is the significance of the oath taken by Avimelech when he made a treaty with Avraham (Bereishis 21:23) – and indeed, even as applies to Avraham himself? He also questions Avraham’s compelling Eliezer to take an oath that he not take a Canaanite wife for Yitzchak (Bereishis 24:3) if Eliezer was not halachically obligated to fulfill the oath. Mitzpeh Itan (Avodah Zara 5b) writes that our proof for the positive obligations of a gentile can be derived from Yaakov; he cites a midrash that all his travails and suffering in regard to Esav, Rachel, Dinah, Yosef, Shimon, etc. were due to his delaying the fulfillment of his oath to Hashem. If Yaakov as a ben Noach is not under obligation if he defaults, then why the punishment?Birkat Hashem
Mishna La’Melech suggests that though a gentile is not duty-bound to keep his vow, nevertheless he is restricted from violating his vow because his swearing falsely in the name of Hashem would be included in the prohibition of birkat Hashem – cursing Hashem – which is one of the seven Noahide laws. Thus, Avimelech, Avraham, Eliezer, and Yaakov were all duty-bound to fulfill their oaths, even though they were only commanded in the Noahide laws.
