Jewish%20thought for Sanhedrin 83:20

<br><br><big><strong>הדרן עלך היו בודקין</strong></big><br><br>

IF THEY FIND HIM NOT GUILTY etc. [AND DRINK NO WINE]. Why drink no wine?— R. Aha b. Hanina said: Scripture states, It is not forprinces<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H], here connected with [H], secret. V. Dan. II, 18, 29. ');">³⁵</span> to say, Where is strongdrink?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Prov. XXXI, 4. ');">³⁶</span> [i.e.,] those who are engagedin [unravelling] the secrets of theworld<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., seeking to bring to light the secrets hidden in men's hearts, and so endeavouring to establish the truth — in a capital charge. ');">³⁷</span> must not become drunk. THE TWO SIDES DEBATE THE CASE TOGETHER UNTIL ONE OF THOSE WHO CONDEMN AGREESWITH etc. But what if they do not agree? R. Aha ruled: He is discharged.R. Johanan said likewise: He is discharged. R. Papa said to Abaye: Then heshould be set free in the firstplace!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., after the court was increased to seventy-one and there was yet no clear majority. Why then delay by debating, surely the court as a whole must not seek to convict? ');">³⁸</span> He answered: Thus did R.Johanan say: It is in order that they may not leave the Court inconfusion.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., without a definite decision. It reflects discredit on a court that it should rise in a state of controversy, having been unable to bring the matter to a definite conclusion (Rashi). ');">³⁹</span> Some say that R. Papasaid to Abaye: Why add, Let him be discharged by the firstcourt?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of twenty-three. If there was then no clear majority, both sides should have endeavoured to win one more vote over to their opinion, and in the case of failure, he should have been set free there and then. ');">⁴⁰</span> To which he replied: R. Joseis in agreement with you. For it has been taught: R. Jose said: Just as acourt of seventy-one is not increased, so may a court of twenty-three notbe increased. Our Rabbis taught: In civil suits, a declaration is made, The judgementnizdakan;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H], from the root [H], may have a twofold meaning; a) old, in that the case has become old in discussion and could not be solved; or b) wise, in that the case has become clear, or wisely established, and is no longer in need of discussion. The following discussion is based on these two alternative meanings. ');">⁴¹</span> but not in capitalcharges.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. Tosef. Sanh. VII. ');">⁴²</span> What does (for note 9 see p. 274) nizdakan mean?Shall we say, The case isdifficult:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'old', I.e., the case is become old and stale through prolonged discussion, and cannot be solved. ');">⁴³</span> surely, the reverse shouldhave been taught!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., in capital cases one should all the more say, 'The judgment nizdakan,' so as to acquit the accused. ');">⁴⁴</span> R. Huna b. Manoahsaid in the name of R. Aha the son of R. Ika: We should reverse (the instances).R. Ashi said: In truth, you need not reverse it: what is meant by 'The judgmentnizdakan'? — The case is wisely[established].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H] according to the Rabbis, denotes 'wise' Cf. Kid. 32b. ');">⁴⁵</span> An objection is raised: The presiding judge declares, 'The judgment nizdakan.'Now, should you agree that it means, 'The case is wisely established,' itis correct, hence the presiding judge makes the declaration. But if you maintainthat it means, The case is difficult;' is it not better that the presidingjudge should not say it? Surely in doing so he actually disgraces himself!— There is no comparison between declaring one's own disgrace and havinganother declare it.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which would be the position if the words were pronounced by another member of the court. ');">⁴⁶</span> Others state:Should you agree that it means, The case is difficult,' it is correct, forthere is no comparison between declaring ones own disgrace and having anotherdeclare it. But if you maintain that it means, 'The case is wisely established:'does not the president [of the court] thereby praise himself? Whereas itis written, Let another praise thee and not thine ownmouth?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Prov. XXVII, 2. ');">⁴⁷</span> — It is different in judicialmatters, since the president is charged with theduty,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of declaring the verdict. ');">⁴⁸</span> as we learnt: When a decisionhas been arrived at, they are admitted, and the presiding judge declares,'So and so, thou art not liable,' or, 'So and so, thou art liable.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Supra 29a. ');">⁴⁹</span>

Explore jewish%20thought for Sanhedrin 83:20. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.