רב אמי ורב אסי הוו יתבי וגרסי ביני עמודי וכל שעתא ושעתא הוו טפחי אעיברא דדשא ואמרי אי איכא דאית ליה דינא ליעול וליתי רב חסדא ורבה בר רב הונא הוו יתבי בדינא כולי יומא הוה קא חליש לבייהו תנא להו רב חייא בר רב מדפתי (שמות יח, יג) ויעמד העם על משה מן הבקר עד הערב וכי תעלה על דעתך שמשה יושב ודן כל היום כולו תורתו מתי נעשית אלא לומר לך כל דיין שדן דין אמת לאמיתו אפילו שעה אחת מעלה עליו הכתוב כאילו נעשה שותף להקדוש ברוך הוא במעשה בראשית כתיב הכא ויעמד העם על משה מן הבקר עד הערב וכתיב התם (בראשית א, ה) ויהי ערב ויהי בקר יום אחד
and the other says: When the litigants commence [their pleas]. And they do not differ: the latter means when they are already engaged in judging;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Having started earlier with a different suit.
');"><sup>12</sup></span> the former, when they are not already engaged in judging. R. Ammi and R. Assi were sitting and studying between the pillars;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of the Beth Hamidrash.
');"><sup>13</sup></span>
Shenei Luchot HaBerit
This is what Rashi has in mind when he explains that the word ואלה as in Exodus 21,1, introduces matters related to what had been discussed previously. Thus in our case the Torah tells us that just as Sinaitic legislation is binding on us, so the judgments pronounced by properly constituted judges are equally binding; hence the details pertaining to each and every commandment are just as essential as the overall nature of the מצוה. The author quotes an unnamed source as stating that the expression אלוהים, by its very definition is in the genitive (i.e. סמוכים). [I have found in the introduction of the כתב והקבלה of Rabbi Mecklenburg that G–d is always in some relationship to His creation, does not dwell in solitary isolation. This may well be what the author has in mind when quoting the line אין אלוקים בכל מקום אלא סמוכים. Ed.] When we said that G–d decided to co-opt the מדת הרחמים, this must not be construed as G–d having abandoned the idea of a world based on the מדת הדין, attribute of Justice. If that were so, it would pose the problem of G–ds omniscience. Rather, G–d decided to apply the attribute of Justice only to those who are equipped with "superior" souls, whose souls originate in the region souls come from. This is why G–d is so strict with people of the calibre of Moses, etc Anyone who has attained the level of being a שותף של הקדוש ברוך הוא, a "partner" of the Almighty in construction of the universe, is judged by these more exacting standards. We have a tradition that anyone who pronounces true judgment becomes a partner of the creation (Tanchuma Shoftim 8). I have explained this elsewhere at greater length. This is also what is meant when G–d told Moses that He had not needed to reveal Himself to the patriarchs in His aspect of the מדת הרחמים, His attribute of Mercy (compare Rashi on Exodus 6,3). The exile in Egypt actually represented a punishment of Abraham for having questioned במה אדע, demanded proof of G–d's promise being fulfilled (Genesis 15,8). Since such exceptional people maintain בראשית, i.e. מעשה בראשית, these people who are the ראשית, the leading, superior people, are judged by the attribute that called the universe into existence.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Shenei Luchot HaBerit
When our sages say (Shabbat 10a) that "any judge who hands down a true verdict can consider himself as G–d's partner in creating the universe," they refer to this co-opting of the attribute of Mercy. Tossaphot query why the Talmud repeats the words דין אמת לאמתו and concludes that the Talmud wants to exclude a judgment based on deception. If we follow our approach there is no need to query the repetition of the word אמת. There are two kinds of judgments, both of which are אמת, true. One of these judgments is more true than the other, however. Our sages have commanded the judges to attempt to reconcile conflicting demands by litigants and to arrive at a mutually agreed compromise, before proceeding to adjudicate strictly on the basis of the law. When the judge succeeds in arranging a פשרה, he has performed both חסד and אמת. When he has achieved this he has ensured the continued existence of the world, since we have learned from G–d that our universe cannot endure if the only yardsticks to be applied were to be those of strict justice. On the other hand, a פשרה, can certainly not be termed "strict justice." The Talmud therefore needs to stress that "true justice" i.e. דין לאמיתו is compromise, since the objective of justice is to ensure the continuity of this universe, and that is precisely what is achieved when people agree to compromise. Any judge who initiates such a compromise has earned a share in the credit for the continued existence of our world. When we are told in Psalms 85,12 that אמת מארץ תצמח, "truth has to grow from earth," the idea is that judges on earth have to see to it that truth prevails.