MISHNA: When the trial has ended in a guilty verdict and the condemned man has been sentenced to be stoned, he is taken out to be stoned. The place of stoning was outside the court and a little beyond it, as it is stated with regard to a blasphemer: ''Take out him who has cursed to outside the camp, and let all that heard him lay their hands upon his head, and let all the congregation stone him'' (Leviticus 24:14).

One man stands at the entrance to the court, with cloths [vehasudarin] in his hand, and another man sits on a horse at a distance from him but where he can still see him. If one of the judges says: I can teach a reason to acquit him, the other, i.e., the man with the cloths, waves the cloths as a signal to the man on the horse, and the horse races off after the court agents who are leading the condemned man to his execution, and he stops them, and they wait until the court determines whether or not the argument has substance. And even if he, the condemned man himself, says: I can teach a reason to acquit myself, he is returned to the courthouse, even four or five times, provided that there is substance to his words.

GEMARA: The Gemara asks: And was the place of stoning just outside the court and nothing more? Does it suffice that the place of execution is only a short distance from the court and no further? But isn’t it taught in a baraita: The place of stoning was outside the distance that is equivalent to the length of the three camps in the wilderness: The camp of the Divine Presence, the camp of the Levites, and the camp of the Israelites. In Jerusalem there were three corresponding camps: The Temple with its courtyard, the Temple Mount, and the rest of the city. The distance in the wilderness outside of the three camps corresponds to a place outside the city walls and limits.

The Gemara answers: Yes, it is as you said, that the place of stoning was outside the three camps. And the practical difference from the fact that the mishna teaches the halakha in this manner is that if it happened that the court went out and convened outside the three camps, even then the place of stoning is set up at a certain distance from the court, and not immediately adjacent to it, so that the court should not appear to be a court of killers. Alternatively, the reason the place of stoning must be distanced from the court is so that the condemned man might have a chance to be saved, i.e., so that during the time it takes for him to be taken from the court to the place of stoning someone will devise a claim in his favor.

The Gemara asks: From where is this matter derived that the stoning is carried out outside the three camps? As the Sages taught a baraita with regard to the verse: ''Take out him who has cursed to outside the camp'' (Leviticus 24:14). This means: Outside the three camps, i.e., even outside the camp of the Israelites. Do you say that he is taken outside the three camps, or is he perhaps taken outside only one camp? Proof is brought that he must be taken outside the three camps: It is stated here that the condemned man is taken ''outside the camp'' and it is stated with regard to the bulls brought as sin-offerings that are burned that they must be burned ''outside the camp'' (Leviticus 4:12). Just as there, the bulls brought as sin-offerings are burned when outside the three camps, so too here, the condemned man is taken outside the three camps.

The Gemara asks: And there, with regard to the bulls brought as sin-offerings that are burned, from where do we derive that they must be burned when outside all three camps? As the Sages taught in a baraita: It is stated about the bull brought as a sin-offering of the High Priest: ''Even the whole bull shall he carry outside the camp unto a clean place, where the ashes are poured out, and burn it'' (Leviticus 4:12), meaning that he should take it outside the three camps. Do you say that he takes it outside the three camps, or is he required to take it outside only one camp?

When the verse states with regard to the bull brought as a communal sin-offering: ''He shall carry the bull outside the camp, and burn it as he burned the first bull'' (Leviticus 4:21), it requires explanation, as there is no need for the verse to state ''outside the camp,'' since it is already stated at the end of that same verse: ''And burn it as he burned the first bull,'' which indicates that all the halakhot of the bull brought as a sin-offering of a High Priest apply to the bull brought as a communal sin-offering. What then does the verse mean when it states ''outside the camp''? To give it a second camp, i.e., it indicates that it must be removed not only from the camp of the Divine Presence, corresponding to the Temple, but also from the Levite camp, corresponding to the Temple Mount.

And when another verse states with regard to the removal of the ash: ''And he shall put off his garments, and put on other garments, and carry forth the ashes outside the camp to a clean place'' (Leviticus 6:4), that verse also requires an explanation, as there is no need for the verse to state this, since it is already stated with regard to the bull brought as a sin-offering of a High Priest: ''Even the whole bull shall he carry outside the camp to a clean place, where the ashes are poured out, and burn it on wood with fire; where the ashes are poured out shall it be burned'' (Leviticus 4:12). The repetition of ''outside the camp'' indicates that he is required to give it a third camp, i.e., teaching that it is burned when outside the Israelite camp, corresponding to the land outside Jerusalem’s walls.

The Gemara challenges this derivation of the halakha governing one who is sentenced to be stoned from the halakha governing the burning of bulls brought as sin-offerings. Perhaps the place of stoning should be learned from the halakha governing offerings slaughtered outside the Temple courtyard, about which the verse also uses the expression ''outside the camp'' (see Leviticus 17:3). Just as there, with regard to offerings slaughtered outside the Temple courtyard, these words mean: Outside only one camp, the camp of the Divine Presence, corresponding to the Temple, as the next verse states: ''And he did not bring it to the door of the Tent of Meeting'' (Leviticus 17:4), i.e., the camp of the Divine Presence, so too here, the condemned man should be stoned outside one camp.

The Gemara answers: For three reasons it is reasonable to derive the halakha governing one who is sentenced to be stoned from the halakha governing bulls brought as sin-offerings that are burned.

The Gemara explains: As with regard to the man to be stoned for blasphemy it states: ''Take out [hotze] him who has cursed to outside the camp,'' which is similar to what is stated about the sin bull-offerings: ''Even the whole bull shall he carry [vehotzi] outside the camp,'' whereas with regard to offerings slaughtered outside the Temple courtyard it merely says: ''Outside the camp.'' Additionally, both in the case of stoning and in the case of the bulls brought as sin-offerings, going outside the camp renders the act fit, as the blasphemer may not be stoned and the bulls may not be burned inside the camp, in contrast to the case of the offerings slaughtered outside the Temple courtyard, where slaughtering them outside the camp renders the act forbidden. And additionally, both in the case of stoning and in the case of the bulls brought as sin-offerings, being outside the camp achieves atonement, as both capital punishment and sin-offerings atone for sin.

The Gemara rejects this reasoning: On the contrary, the halakha governing one who is sentenced to be stoned should be derived from the halakha governing offerings slaughtered outside the Temple courtyard, for four reasons.

The Gemara explains the four reasons: As in both cases it is a person who is outside, either the one who is taken outside for stoning, or the one who slaughters the offerings outside the Temple courtyard, whereas in the case of the bulls brought as sin-offerings, it is the bulls that are carried outside the camp. Additionally, both the blasphemer and the one who slaughters offerings outside the Temple courtyard have committed a sin, while the bull has not. Additionally, both the blasphemer and the one who slaughters offerings outside the Temple courtyard pay with their souls, as slaughtering an offering outside the Temple is punishable with karet. And lastly, both in the case of the blasphemer and in the case of offerings slaughtered outside the Temple courtyard, the halakha of disqualification of an offering that was sacrificed with the intent to consume it after its designated time [piggul] is not applicable, whereas this halakha is applicable to the bulls brought as sin-offerings.

The Gemara explains: Nevertheless, the baraita prefers to compare one case requiring going outside the camp to render an act fit and another case requiring going outside the camp to render an act fit, rather than comparing one case requiring going outside the camp to render an act fit and another case of going outside the camp that renders the act forbidden, as this is the most notable of the factors mentioned.

Rav Pappa said: The matter of the location of the place of stoning can be derived from the verses themselves: Where was Moses sitting when the matter of the blasphemer was brought before him? In the Levite camp, as he was a Levite, and it was there that the blasphemer was brought for trial. And the Merciful One said to Moses: ''Take out him who has cursed to outside the camp,'' indicating that he should be taken outside the Levite camp into the Israelite camp. And later it says: ''And Moses spoke to the children of Israel, and they brought him that had cursed out of the camp, and they stoned him with a stone. And the children of Israel did as the Lord commanded Moses'' (Leviticus 24:23), teaching that he was taken outside the Israelite camp as well.

The Gemara raises an objection: This additional verse is necessary to teach us about the implementation of God’s instructions, i.e., that the Jewish people did in fact carry out God’s command, but this verse should not be understood as referring to an additional camp. The Gemara answers: The implementation of God’s instructions is written explicitly, as it is stated in the continuation of the verse: