Warrants for the infliction of capital punishment, as opposed to private retribution or vengeance, are found in the Pentateuchal codes for the commission of any one of the following crimes: adultery (<ref>Lev. xx. 10; Deut. xxii. 22)</ref>; bestiality (<ref>Ex. xxii. 18 [A. V. 19]; Lev. xx. 15)</ref>; blasphemy (<ref>Lev. xxiv. 16)</ref>; false evidence in capital cases (<ref>Deut. xix. 16-19)</ref>; false prophecy (<ref>Deut. xiii. 6, xviii. 20)</ref>; idolatry, actual or virtual (<ref>Lev. xx. 2; Deut. xiii. 7-19, xvii. 2-7)</ref>; incestuous or unnatural connections (<ref>Lev. xviii. 22, xx. 11-14)</ref>; insubordination to supreme authority (<ref>Deut. xvii. 12)</ref>; kidnaping (<ref>Ex. xxi. 16; Deut. xxiv. 7)</ref>; licentiousness of a priest's daughter (<ref>Lev. xxi. 9)</ref>; murder (<ref>Ex. xxi. 12; Lev. xxiv. 17; Num. xxxv. 16 et seq.)</ref>; rape committed on a betrothed woman (<ref>Deut. xxii. 25)</ref>; striking or cursing a parent, or otherwise rebelling against parental authority (<ref>Ex. xxi. 15, 17; Lev. xx. 9; Deut. xxi. 18-21)</ref>; Sabbath-breaking (<ref>Ex. xxxi. 14, xxxv. 2; Num. xv. 32-36)</ref>; witchcraft and augury (<ref>Ex. xxii. 17; Lev. xx. 27)</ref>.

Only in comparatively few instances is the particular mode of death incurred by the commission of a crime prescribed. Blasphemy, idolatry, Sabbath-breaking, witchcraft, prostitution by a betrothed virgin, or deceiving her husband at marriage as to her chastity (<ref>Deut. xxii. 21)</ref>, and the rebellious son are, according to the Pentateuchal laws, to be punished with death by stoning; bigamous marriage with a wife's mother and the prostitution of a priest's daughter are punished byburning; communal apostasy is punished by the sword. With reference to all other capital offenses, the law ordains that the perpetrator shall die a violent death, occasionally adding the expression, "His (their) blood shall be upon him (them)." This expression, as we shall see presently, post-Biblical legislation applies to death by stoning. The Bible speaks also of hanging (<ref>Deut. xxi. 22)</ref>, but, according to the rabbinical interpretation, not as a mode of execution, but rather of exposure after death (.<ref>Sanh. vi. 4, 75b).</ref>

An old-established rule of rabbinic jurisprudence forbids the infliction of punishment where there is no Biblical authority for such punishment (.<ref>Sanh. 82b; compare Sifre, Deut. 154). </ref> That authority, however, may be established by ''Gezerah Shawah ()''; i.e., by comparing similar or analogous expressions in two or more passages, in one of which the meaning and import of the expression are unmistakable (.<ref>Ker. 5a). </ref> Similarly in cases where the Pentateuch imposes the death penalty, without specifying the mode of death, Talmudic jurisprudence discovers the particular mode intended by means of the principle of Gezerah shawah. Thus: In reference to the man or the woman who makes use of "a familiar spirit"—i.e., "a wizard"—the law says (<ref>Lev. xx. 27)</ref>, "They shall stone them with stones; their blood shall be upon them" (). Here the expression "''Demehem bam" '' is plainly used in connection with death by stoning; hence it is argued that, wherever the same expression occurs in the Pentateuch in connection with the death penalty, it means death by stoning, and consequently the punishment of the crimes mentioned in Lev. xx. 9, 11, 12, 13, 16, is the same: death by stoning (.<ref>Mek., Mishpaṭim, 17; Sifra, Ḳedoshim, ix.; Sanh. 53b, 66a). </ref> Again, with reference to the perpetrator of bestiality the law reads (<ref>Lev. xx. 15)</ref>, "He shall surely be put to death; and ye shall slay the beast." Here the particular mode of death is not stated, but rabbinic law again infers it by means of a ''Gezerah shawah. Since, with reference to the enticer to idolatry, the Bible (Deut. xiii 10 [A. V. 9]) employs the term Harag = "to slay" ("Thou shalt surely slay him"), and this is immediately explained by the addition (ib. 11 [A. V. 10]), "Thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die," it follows that the term "harag" used in reference to the beast likewise means to slay by stoning. And as for the criminal himself, his sentence is the same as that of the beast in connection with which he is mentioned (Sifra, l.c. x.; Sanh. 54b). In the case of the instigator to communal apostasy ("maddiaḥ") the law reads (Deut. xiii. 6 [A. V. 5]), "He hath spoken . . . to thrust thee out of the way of the Lord," and in that of the enticer of individuals ("mesit") the identical expression is used: "He hath sought to thrust thee away from the Lord" (ib. 11 [A. V. 10]); hence as in the latter case stoning is the penalty, so it is in the former (Sifre, Deut. 86; Sanh. 89b). Finally, concerning the witch, it is said (Ex. xii. 17 [A. V. 18]), "Thou shalt not suffer her to live," and elsewhere (ib. xix. 13) the expression, "Shall not live," is used in connection with "He shall surely be stoned"; therefore in the first case the particular penalty is to be the same as in the second (Mek., l.c.; Sanh. 67a)''.

According to these conclusionsSince, rabbinic law based on Pentateuchal authority, expressed or inferred, affixes death by stoning with reference to each of the following eighteen crimes: 1. Bestiality committed by man (Lev. xx. 15; Sanh. vii. 4enticer to idolatry, 54b; Sifra, Ḳedoshim, xthe Bible<ref>Deut. 1; Mekxiii 10 [A., Mishpaṭim, 17)V. 2. Bestiality com mitted by woman 9]</ref> employs the term Harag = "to slay" (Lev. xx. 16: Sanh. vii. 4"Thou shalt surely slay him"), 54b; Sifra, Ḳedoshim, xand this is immediately explained by the addition<ref>ib. 3; Mek11 [A., Mishpaṭim, 17)V. 3. Blasphemy (Lev. xxiv. 16; Sanh. vii. 410]</ref>, 43a; Sifra, Emor, xix.). 4. Criminal conversation "Thou shalt stone him with a betrothed virgin (Deut. xxii. 23stones, 24; Sanh. vii. 4that he die, 66b; Sifre, Deut. 242). 5. Criminal conversation with one's own daughter-" it follows that the term "harag" used in-law (Levreference to the beast likewise means to slay by stoning. xx. 12; Sanh. vii. 4And as for the criminal himself, 53a; Sifra, Ḳedoshim, ix. 13). 6. Criminal conversation his sentence is the same as that of the beast in connection with one's own mother (Levwhich he is mentioned. xviii. 7, xx. 11; Sanh. vii. 4, 53a; <ref>Sifra, Ḳedoshim, ixl. 12)c. 7x. Criminal conversation with one's own stepmother (Lev. xviii. 8, xx. 11; Sanh. vii. 4, 53a; Sifra, Ḳedoshim, ix. 12). 8. Cursing a parent 54b</ref> In the case of the instigator to communal apostasy (Lev. xx. 9; Sanh. vii. 4, 66a; Mek., Mishpaṭim, 17; Sifra, Ḳedoshim, ix. 7''maddiaḥ''). 9. Enticing individuals to idolatry: "Mesit" (the law reads <ref>Deut. xiii. 7-12 6 [A. V. 6-115]; Sanh. vii. 4</ref>, 67a; Sifre, Deut"He hath spoken . 90). 10. Idolatry to thrust thee out of the way of the Lord," and in that of the enticer of individuals (Deut. xvii. 2-7; Sanh. vii. 4, 60b; Sifre, Deut. 149''mesit''). 11. Instigating communities to idolatrythe identical expression is used: "MaddiaḥHe hath sought to thrust thee away from the Lord" (Deut<ref>ib. xiii. 2-6 11 [A. V. 1-510]</ref>; Sanhhence as in the latter case stoning is the penalty, so it is in the former. vii. 4, 67a; <ref>Sifre, Deut. 86). 12. Necromancy (Lev. xx. 27; Sanh. vii. 489b</ref> Finally, 65a; Sifraconcerning the witch, Ḳedoshim, xiit is said<ref>Ex., end)xii. 1317 [A. Offering one's own children to Molech (LevV. xx. 2; Sanh. vii. 418]</ref>, 64a; Sifra"Thou shalt not suffer her to live, Ḳedoshim, viii" and elsewhere<ref>ib., parashah 10, beginning). 14. Pederasty (Lev. xxxix. 13; Sanh. vii. 4</ref> the expression, 54a; Sifra"Shall not live, Ḳedoshim, ix. 14). 15. Pythonism (Lev. xx. 27" is used in connection with "He shall surely be stoned"; Sanhtherefore in the first case the particular penalty is to be the same as in the second. vii. 4, 65a; Sifra, Ḳedoshim, xi., end). 16. Rebelling against parents (Deut. xxi. 18-21; Sanh. vii<ref>Mek. 4, 68b; Sifre, Deutl. 220)c. 17. Sabbath-breaking (Num. xv. 32-36; Sanh. vii. 4; Sifre, Num. 114). 18. Witchcraft (Ex. xxii. 17 [A. V. 18]; Sanh. vii. 4, 67a; Mek., Mishpaṭim, 17).</ref>

As in the several classes included in the above category (1, 2, 5, 7, 8, 14) rabbinic jurisprudence establishes the particular punishment of the criminal on the basis of Gezerah shawah, so in most ===Which cases of the following category the particular punishment is deduced from Gezerah shawah. Thus, with reference to bigamy with mother and daughter the law reads (Lev. xx. 14): "It is wickedness" ("Zimmah hi"), and because elsewhere (ib. xviii. 17) the identical expression is used with reference to criminal conversation of man with female relatives of other degrees, rabbinic law affixes the penalty which the Pentateuch attaches to the former also to the latter (Sanh. ix. 1, 75a; Sifra, Ḳedoshim, ix. 17). On the same principle the Rabbis establish the penalty for such conversation with relatives within certain ascending degrees, comparing them with the descending degrees of like removes, explicitly mentioned in the Bible (Yeb. 21a et seq.; Yer. Sanh. ix. 26d; Yer. Yeb. ii. 3d).by stoning===

The crimes punished in According to these conclusions, rabbinic law with based on Pentateuchal authority, expressed or inferred, affixes death by burning are accordingly stoning to each of the following teneighteen crimes: * Bestiality committed by man.<ref>Lev. xx. 15; Sanh. vii. 4, 54b; Sifra, Ḳedoshim, x. 1; Mek. Criminal conversation , Mishpaṭim, 17</ref>* Bestiality committed by a priest's daughter (woman.<ref>Lev. xxixx. 9; 16: Sanh. ixvii. 14, 76a54b; Sifra, EmorḲedoshim, x. 3; Mek., Mishpaṭim, i17</ref> * Blasphemy<ref>Lev. xxiv. 14 et seq16; Sanh.)vii. 24, 43a; Sifra, Emor, xix. </ref>* Criminal conversation with one's own daughter (Yeba betrothed virgin.<ref>Deut. xxii. 3a23, 24; Sanh. ixvii. 14, 66b; Sifre, 75a). 3Deut. 242</ref> * Criminal conversation with one's own daughter's daughter (-in-law.<ref>Lev. xviiixx. 1012; Sanh. ixvii. 14, 53a; Sifra, 75a)K. 4edoshim, ix. 13</ref> * Criminal conversation with one's own son's daughter (mother.<ref>Lev. xviii. 107, xx. 11; Sanh. ixvii. 14, 53a; Sifra, 75a)K. 5edoshim, ix. 12</ref> * Criminal conversation with one's own stepdaughter (stepmother.<ref>Lev. xviii. 178, xx. 11; Sanh. ixvii. 14, 75a53a; Sifra, ḲedoshimK.edoshim, ix. 16). 612</ref> * Cursing a parent. Criminal conversation with one's own stepdaughter's daughter (<ref>Lev. xviiixx. 179; Sanh. ixvii. 4, 66a; Mek., Mishpat. 1im, 75a17; Sifra, ḲedoshimK.edoshim, ix. 16)7</ref> * Enticing individuals to idolatry: "Mesit".<ref>Deut. xiii. 7-12 [A. V. 6-11]; Sanh. vii. 4, 67a; Sifre, Deut. 90</ref> * Idolatry.<ref>Deut. xvii. 2-7; Sanh. Criminal conversation with one's own stepson's daughter (vii. 4, 60b; Sifre, Deut. 149</ref> * Instigating communities to idolatry: "Maddiah.".<ref>Deut. xiii. 2-6 [A. V. 1-5]; Sanh. vii. 4, 67a; Sifre, Deut. 86</ref> * Necromancy.<ref>Lev. xviiixx. 1727; Sanh. ixvii. 14, 75a65a; Sifra, ḲedoshimK.edoshim, ixxi. 16). 8. Criminal conversation with , end</ref> * Offering one's own mother-in-law (children to Molech.<ref>Lev. xx. 142; Sanh. ixvii. 14, 75a64a; Sifra, ḲedoshimK.edoshim, viii., parashah 10, ixbeginning</ref> * Pederasty. 15)<ref>Lev. 9xx. Criminal conversation with one's own mother-in-law's mother (13; Sanh. ixvii. 14, 75a54a; Sifra, K. Ḳedoshimedoshim, ix. 1714</ref> * Pythonism.<ref>Lev. xx. 27; Sanh. vii. 4, 65a; YebSifra, K. 21a et seqedoshim, xi.), end</ref> * Rebelling against parents. 10<ref>Deut. xxi. Criminal conversation with one's own father18-in-law's mother (21; Sanh. ixvii. 14, 75a68b; SifraSifre, ḲedoshimDeut. 220</ref> * Sabbath-breaking.<ref>Num. xv. 32-36; Sanh. vii. 4; Sifre, ixNum. 114</ref> * Witchcraft.<ref>Ex. xxii. 17[A. V. 18]; YebSanh. 21a)vii.4, 67a; Mek., Mishpat.im, 17</ref>

The nine As in the several classes included in the above category (1, 2, 5, 7, 8, 14) rabbinic jurisprudence establishes the particular punishment of the criminal on the basis of Gezerah shawah, so in most cases of incest here enumerated the following category the particular punishment is deduced from Gezerah shawah. Thus, with reference to bigamy with mother and daughter the law reads.<ref>Lev. xx. 14</ref> "It is wickedness" (2-10''Zimmah hi'') subject , and because elsewhere.<ref>ib. xviii. 17</ref>the perpetrator identical expression is used with reference to criminal conversation of man with female relatives of other degrees, rabbinic law affixes the penalty of burningonly when which the Pentateuch attaches to the former also to the latter.<ref>Sanh. ix. 1, 75a; Sifra, K.edoshim, ix. 17</ref> On the same principle the Rabbis establish the crime is committed during penalty for such conversation with relatives within certain ascending degrees, comparing them with the life descending degrees of his legal wife (like removes, explicitly mentioned in the Bible.<ref>Yeb. 95a21a et seq.; Yer. Sanh. 76bix. 26d; see Maimonides, "Yad," Issure Bi'ah, iYer. Yeb. 5)ii.3d</ref>

Two crimes only are punished ===Which cases by slaying: 1. Communal apostasy (Deut. xiii. 13-16 [A. V. 12-15]; Sanh. ix. 1, 52b; Sifre, Deut. 94.). 2. Murder (Ex. xxi. 12; Lev. xxiv. 17; Sanh. ix. 1, 52b; Mek., Mishpaṭim, 4; Sifre, Num. 160; see Homicide).burning===

The penalty for crimes punished in rabbinic law with death by burning are accordingly the first is explicitly declared (Deut xiiifollowing ten: * Criminal conversation by a priest's daughter.<ref>Lev. xxi. 9; Sanh. ix. 1, 76a; Sifra, Emor, i. 14 et seq.</ref> * Criminal conversation with one's own daughter.<ref>Yeb. 3a; Sanh. ix. 1, 75a</ref> * Criminal conversation with one's own daughter's daughter.<ref>Lev. xviii. 10; Sanh. ix. 1, 75a</ref> * Criminal conversation with one's own son's daughter.<ref>Lev. xviii. 10; Sanh. ix. 1, 75a</ref> * Criminal conversation with one's own stepdaughter.<ref>Lev. xviii. 17; Sanh. ix. 1, 75a; Sifra, K.edoshim, ix. 16 [A</ref> * Criminal conversation with one's own stepdaughter's daughter.<ref>Lev. Vxviii. 15]): "Thou shalt surely smite the inhabitants of that city 17; Sanh. ix. 1, 75a; Sifra, K.edoshim, ix. 16</ref> * Criminal conversation with the edge of the sword"one's own stepson's daughter.<ref>Lev. xviii. 17; Sanh. ix. 1, 75a; but that of the latter is again based on the principle of the Gezerah shawahSifra, K.edoshim, ix. As 16</ref> * Criminal conversation with reference to a murderer the one's own mother-in-law is (Ex. xxi<ref>Lev. xx. 14; Sanh. ix. 20)1, "He shall surely be punished" ("naḳom yinnaḳem"75a; literallySifra, "It shall surely be avenged")K.edoshim, and elsewhere (Levix. 15</ref> * Criminal conversation with one's own mother-in-law's mother.<ref>Sanh. ix. 1, 75a; Sifra. xxviK. 25) an "avenging sword" ("ḥereb noḳemet") is spoken ofedoshim, the Rabbis argue that the term "naḳom" applied to homicide has the significance given to it by its connection ix. 17; Yeb. 21a et seq.</ref> * Criminal conversation with sword (one's own father-in-law's mother.<ref>Sanh. viiix. 31, 52b75a; MekSifra, K.edoshim, Mishpaṭim, 4)ix. 17; Yeb.21a</ref>

To the three modes The nine cases of capital punishment explicitly mentioned in the Pentateuchal laws, rabbinic law adds a fourth; viz., strangulation. In postincest here enumerated (2-Biblical jurisprudence this is the penalty incurred by 10) subject the perpetrator of any one of the crimes to which the Pentateuch affixes death, without specifying the mode penalty of death and where no conclusions from Gezerah shawah can be deduced. The Rabbis argue thus: No death-sentence pronounced in burningonly when the Bible indefinitely may be construed with severity; on the contrary, it must be interpreted leniently. And since the Rabbis viewed strangulation as the easiest of deaths, they decided that crime is committed during the undefined death-sentence life of the Pentateuchal code means strangulationhis legal wife. Moreover, the Bible frequently speaks of death sent "by Heaven" for certain sins (for example: Gen<ref>Yeb. xxxviii95a; Sanh. 7, 1076b; Lev. x. 7see Maimonides, 9); and as the death visited by Heaven leaves no outward mark"Yad, so must the death inflicted by a human tribunal leave no outward marks" Issure Bi'ah, and that is possible only in an execution by strangulation (Meki., Mishpaṭim, 5; Sifra, Ḳedoshim, ix. 11; Sanh. 52b).</ref>

Two crimes only are punished by slaying: * Communal apostasy.<ref>Deut. xiii. 13-16 [A. V. 12-15]; Sanh. ix. 1, 52b; Sifre, Deut. 94.</ref> * Murder.<ref>Ex. xxi. 12; Lev. xxiv. 17; Sanh. ix. 1, 52b; Mek., Mishpat.im, 4; Sifre, Num. 160; see Homicide</ref> The penalty for the first is explicitly declared.<ref>Deut xiii. 16 [A. V. 15]</ref> "Thou shalt surely smite the inhabitants of that city with the edge of the sword"; but that of the latter is again based on the principle of the Gezerah shawah. As with reference to a murderer the law is.<ref>Ex. xxi. 20</ref> "He shall surely be punished" (''nak.om yinnak.em''; literally, "It shall surely be avenged"), and elsewhere.<ref>Lev. xxvi. 25</ref>an "avenging sword" (''h.ereb nok.emet'') is spoken of, the Rabbis argue that the term "nak.om" applied to homicide has the significance given to it by its connection with sword.<ref>Sanh. vii. 3, 52b; Mek., Mishpat.im, 4</ref> To the three modes of capital punishment explicitly mentioned in the Pentateuchal laws, rabbinic law adds a fourth; viz., strangulation. In post-Biblical jurisprudence this is the penalty incurred by the perpetrator of any one of the crimes to which the Pentateuch affixes death, without specifying the mode of death and where no conclusions from Gezerah shawah can be deduced. The Rabbis argue thus: No death-sentence pronounced in the Bible indefinitely may be construed with severity; on the contrary, it must be interpreted leniently. And since the Rabbis viewed strangulation as the easiest of deaths, they decided that the undefined death-sentence of the Pentateuchal code means strangulation. Moreover, the Bible frequently speaks of death sent "by Heaven" for certain sins.<ref>for example: Gen. xxxviii. 7, 10; Lev. x. 7, 9</ref> and as the death visited by Heaven leaves no outward mark, so must the death inflicted by a human tribunal leave no outward marks, and that is possible only in an execution by strangulation.<ref>Mek., Mishpat.im, 5; Sifra, K.edoshim, ix. 11; Sanh. 52b</ref> ===Which cases by strangulation=== By strangulation the following six crimes are punished: * Adultery.<ref>Lev. xx. 10; Deut. xxii. 22; Sanh. xi. 1, 52b; Sifra, K.edoshim, ix. 11; Sifre, Deut. 241; see Adultery</ref> * Bruising a parent.<ref>Ex. xxi. 15; Sanh. xi. 1, 84b; Mek., Mishpat.im, 5</ref> * False prophecy.<ref>Deut. xviii. 20; Sanh. xi. 1, 5, 89a; Sifre, Deut. 178</ref> * Insubordination to supreme authority; "Zak.en mamre,".<ref>Deut. xvii. 12; Sanh. xi. 1, 87a; Sifre, Deut. 155</ref> * Kidnaping.<ref>Ex. xxi. 16; Deut. xxiv. 7; Sanh. xi. 1, 85b; Mek., Mishpat.im, 5; Sifre, Deut. 273; see Abduction</ref> * Prophesying in the name of heathen deities.<ref>Deut. xviii. 20; Sanh. xi. 1, 5, 89a; Sifre, Deut. 178</ref> Of the four modes of capital punishment—stoning, burning, slaying, and strangulation—the first is considered by the majority of Rabbis the severest; the last, the mildest (.<ref>Sanh. vii. 1, 49b et seq.). </ref> Hence when convicts condemned to different modes of capital punishment become intermixed beyond the possibility of identification and classification, all of them suffer the sentence carrying with it the death named lowest in the order cited above (.<ref>Sanh. ix. 3, 80b). </ref> On the other hand, when one is found guilty of several crimes of different grades of punishment, he will suffer the severest death to which he is liable (.<ref>Sanh. ix. 4, 81a; compare Tos. Yom-Ṭob T.ob to Mishnah).</ref>

Capital punishment in rabbinic law, or indeed any other punishment, must not be inflicted, except by the verdict of a regularly constituted court (Lesser Sanh.) of three-and-twenty qualified members (.<ref>Sanh. i. 1; Sifre, Num. 160), </ref> and except on the most trustworthy and convincing testimony of at least two qualified eye-witnesses to the crime (.<ref>Deut. xvii. 6, xix. 15; Soṭah Sot.ah vi. 3; Sifre, Num. 161; ib. Deut. 150, 188; Sanh. 30a) </ref>who must also depose that the culprit had been forewarned as to the criminality and the consequences of his project (.<ref>Sanh. v. 1, 40b et seq.; see Hatraah). </ref> The culprit must be a person of legal age and of sound mind, and the crime must be proved to have been committed of the culprit's free will and without the aid of others (.<ref>see Abetment); </ref> and if any one wilfully kills him before conviction, a charge of murder will lie against such perpetrator (.<ref>Tosef., B. ḲK.. ix. 15; Sifre, Num. 161; compare 'Ar. i. 3, 6b). </ref> Nor may an execution be deferred, except in the case of the "Zaḳen Zak.en mamre" (.<ref>Sanh. xi. 4), </ref> or of a woman about to be delivered of a child (.<ref>'Ar. i. 4), </ref> nor may it be carried out on a day sacred to religion (.<ref>Mek., MishpaṭimMishpat.im, 4; ib. WayyaḳhelWayyak.hel; Yeb. 6b; Sanh. 35b). </ref>  On the day that the verdict is pronounced, the convict is led forth to execution (Sanh. 34a). Looking upon the sinner as upon the victim of folly (Soṭah Sot.ah 3a), and considering death an expiation for misdeeds (Ber. 60a; Sanh. vi. 2; see Atonement), the Rabbis would not permit the protraction of the interval between sentence and execution, which they considered as the most terrible period in the convict's existence. These considerations prompted them to afford the convict every possible alleviation of the pains and sufferings concomitant with the execution, and to direct the execution itself so as to prevent the mutilation of the body, or to reduce such mutilation, where it is unavoidable—as in stoning or slaying—to a minimum. The Pentateuchal law (Lev. xix. 18) prescribes, "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thy-self"; and the Rabbis maintain that this love must be extended beyond the limits of social intercourse in life, and applied even to the convicted criminal who, "though a sinner, is still thy brother" (Mak. iii. 15; Sanh. 44a): "The spirit of love must be manifested by according him a decent death" (Sanh. 45a, 52a).