Thank you very much. One last question based on what you're writing....... a sugya earlier in the mesechta, regarding Shlomo Hamelech, the gemara says that the demon who impersonated Shlomo hid his feet while having relations with the king's wives because they were like that of a chicken. If demons have chicken feet, then pulling out the corpse from a shallow pit should reveal that.
Max Weiman
Menachem, this question is asked by the Sefer Geresh Yerachim (by Rav Aryeh Leib Tzuntz, the Maharal Tzuntz) on the Gemara (Gitin 68b) that states that the feet of the demons are like those of a chicken. He does not give an answer.
1) I was actually careful, in my last reply, to anticipate this question when I wrote that the corpse may have been mutilated by its death. Therefore, it might no longer be possible to check the feet. I may now be able to support this idea on the basis of what Rebbi Akiva Eiger writes on the Mishnayos, about the words of our Mishnah (66a), "Somebody who had been thrown into a pit." Rebbi Akiva Eiger writes that the simple understanding is that we saw that her husband had been thrown into the pit and made his voice heard from there that they should write a Get for his wife. Either we knew who was thrown into the pit or at least we saw that someone was thrown in. Since it was a violent death, we can suggest that the body was mutilated and it was no longer possible to examine the feet.
2) Another possible answer may be found in the words of the Beis Shmuel on Shulchan Aruch, Even ha'Ezer 17:26. He writes that even if we examine the corpse and satisfy ourselves that it is a human, nevertheless it is possible that it was a demon that cried out to write a Get. The demon might have afterwards left while the corpse that we found is that of a man who had no intent to divorce his wife.
Again, according to this it will not help to check the feet because the voice might have come from another source.
Kol Tuv,
Dovid Bloom
Hi, I am responding to an old post about sheidim on gittin 66, where people debate the merits or non merits of sheidim. See Nishmas Chaim perek 3 section 12 and 13. He essentially outlines 3 catergories of sheidim ranging from behaima, actually evil, and actually holy like an angel and brings yosef shida. I think it would clear up the discussion I saw on your forum.
Nesanel Lieberman, Ramat Bet Shemesh Gimmel, Israel
I saw there in Nishmas Yisrael (Ma'amar 3, Perek 12) that he writes that there are three types of Shedim. The first type are like Mal'achei ha'Shares, the second type like people, and the third type like animals. Then he writes that some of them are wise in the Written Torah and in Torah she'Ba'al Peh. He adds that Yosef Shida is called such because he was taught by a Shed. (The text reads, "d'Olif," "that he was taught." However, there are other texts of the Zohar that read "d'Olid," "that he was born" from a Shed.) It seems to me that he is coming to illustrate what he just said, that there are some who are wise in the Torah. This is why Yosef Shida was able to learn Torah from a Shed. It seems that Yosef Shida was not himself a Shed but he had this name because he had been taught Torah by a Shed.
There seems to be a source for this from Pesachim 110a, where Rav Papa says that Yosef Shida told him that four of any commodity is damaging (because it is Zugos, pairs; for example, one should not eat four eggs). It appears to me that the Nishmas Yisrael understands that Yosef was a human but he was taught by one of the learned Shedim.
However, I do not understand how this fits with Eruvin 43a where we learn that in the course of one Shabbos, seven Shi'urim were said in different places by the same Magid Shi'ur. It was not possible to get from one place to another without leaving the Techum. The Gemara answers that Yosef Shida gave the Shi'urim, and Rashi explains that Yosef Shida did not keep Shabbos. So, if I am correct in my understanding of the Nishmas Yisrael that Yosef Shida was a human who learned Torah from wise Shedim, why then did he not keep Shabbos?
I found, bs'd, another source that somebody called Shida might not necessarily be a Shed. This is from Yevamos 122a where Rebbi Chanina said, "Yonasan Shida said to me that Shedim have a shadow but they do not have a shadow of a shadow." Rashi (DH Limdani) writes that Yonasan Shida taught Rebbi Chanina and adds that either Yonasan Shida was a Shed or was an expert in Shedim. So, according to the second Peshat in Rashi, somebody can have "Shida" added to his common name even though he is a person.
I also found, bs'd, in Talmud Yerushalmi Yevamos (on the same Mishnah that is on 122a in the Bavli) that it states, "Rebbi Chanina said, 'Rebbi Yonasan taught me....'" So, he who is called Yonasan Shida in the Bavli is called Rebbi Yonasan in the Yerushalmi and appears to be the same person. This is a support for the second Peshat in Rashi in Yevamos 122a that Yonasan Shida was a person given that name because he was an expert in Shedim. I argue that it is also a support for my understanding of the Nishmas Yisrael that Yosef Shida was a person who learned from wise Shedim.
(To answer the question I asked above from Eruvin 43a, I think we will just have to say that the Zohar, cited by the Nishmas Yisrael, disagrees with the Talmud Bavli on this point.)
Kol Tuv,
Dovid Bloom