Sanhedrin 15

Chapter 15

א פסילנא לך לדינא אמר ליה רב לרב כהנא פוק דייניה חזייה דהוה קא גאיס [ביה] א"ל אי צייתא צייתא ואי לא מפיקנא לך רב מאונך
1 'I am disqualified from being your judge,' and turning to R. Kahana, said: 'Go you and judge the case'. R. Kahana noticed that the man presumed too much on his acquaintance with Rab, so he remarked: 'If you will submit to my judgment, well and good; If not, I shall put Rab out of your mind [by showing you my authority].'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'I shall get Rab out of your ears'; i.e., by applying the sanctions of excommunication ');"><sup>1</sup></span> <i>Ye shall hear the small and the great alike</i>.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. I, 17 ');"><sup>2</sup></span>
ב (דברים א, יז) כקטן כגדול תשמעון אמר ריש לקיש שיהא חביב עליך דין של פרוטה כדין של מאה מנה למאי הלכתא אילימא לעיוני ביה ומיפסקיה פשיטא אלא לאקדומיה
2 Resh Lakish says: This verse indicates that a law-suit involving a mere <i>perutah</i><span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The smallest of coins. ');"><sup>3</sup></span> must be regarded as of the same importance as one involving a hundred mina.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A weight in gold or silver, equal to one hundred shekels. ');"><sup>4</sup></span>
ג (דברים א, יז) לא תגורו מפני איש (א"ר חנן אל תכניס דבריך מפני איש) (דברים א, יז) כי המשפט לאלהים הוא א"ר חמא ברבי חנינא אמר הקב"ה לא דיין לרשעים שנוטלין מזה ממון ונותנים לזה שלא כדין אלא שמטריחין אותי להחזיר ממון לבעליו
3 For what practical purpose is this laid down? If it is to urge the need of equal consideration and investigation, is it not self-evident! Rather, it is to give the case due priority, if it should be first in order. <i>For the judgment is God's</i>.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. I, 17. ');"><sup>5</sup></span>
ד (דברים א, יז) והדבר אשר יקשה מכם א"ר חנינא ואיתימא רבי יאשיה על דבר זה נענש משה שנאמר (במדבר כז, ה) ויקרב משה את משפטן לפני ה' מתקיף לה רב נחמן בר יצחק מי כתיב ואשמיעכם (דברים א, יז) ושמעתיו כתיב אי גמירנא גמירנא ואי לא אזלינא וגמירנא
4 R. Hamma, son of R. Hanina, comments: The Holy One, blessed be He, hath said: It is not enough for the wicked [judges] that they take away money from one and give it to another unjustly, but they put Me to the trouble of returning it to its owner. <i>And the cause that is too hard for you, bring unto me</i>.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. ');"><sup>6</sup></span>
ה אלא כדתניא ראויה פרשת נחלות שתיכתב על ידי משה רבינו אלא שזכו בנות צלפחד ונכתב על ידן ראויה היתה פרשת מקושש שתיכתב ע"י משה רבינו אלא שנתחייב מקושש ונכתבה על ידו ללמדך שמגלגלין חובה ע"י חייב וזכות על ידי זכאי
5 R. Hanina, [according to some, R. Josiah,] says: For this utterance Moses was punished,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because he attached too much authority to himself. ');"><sup>7</sup></span> as we can infer from this later passa<i>ge: And Moses brought their cause before the Lord</i>.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. XXVII, 5 i.e., the case of the daughters of Zelophehad which he knows not how to decide. ');"><sup>8</sup></span>
ו כתיב (דברים א, טז) ואצוה את שופטיכם בעת ההיא וכתיב (דברים א, יח) ואצוה אתכם בעת ההיא אמר רבי אלעזר אמר רבי שמלאי אזהרה לציבור שתהא אימת דיין עליהן ואזהרה לדיין שיסבול את הציבור עד כמה אמר רבי חנן ואיתימא רבי שבתאי (במדבר יא, יב) כאשר ישא האומן את היונק
6 R. Nahman objects to this comment, and asks: Did Moses say: 'Bring it unto me and I will let you hear it'? No, he said: '<i>I will hear it</i>; if I am instructed, it is well! If not, I will get me instruction [how to deal with it]'. And the case of the daughters of Zelophehad is to be explained as was taught:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' B.B. 119a. ');"><sup>9</sup></span> The section relating to the laws of inheritance was intended to have been written at the instance of Moses our Teacher. The daughters of Zelophehad, however, were found worthy to have the section recorded on their account. Similarly, the law concerning the gathering of sticks on the Sabbath<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. XV, 32. ');"><sup>10</sup></span>
ז כתיב (דברים לא, ז) כי אתה תבוא וכתיב (דברים לא, כג) כי אתה תביא אמר רבי יוחנן אמר לו משה ליהושע אתה והזקנים שבדור עמהם אמר לו הקב"ה טול מקל והך על קדקדם דבר אחד לדור ואין שני דברין לדור
7 was to have been written at the instance of Moses our Teacher. The gatherer, however, was found culpable, and so it was recorded on his account. This is to teach us that evil is brought about through the agency of sinful men, and good through that of worthy men. It is written, <i>And I charged your judges at that time;</i><span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. I, 16. ');"><sup>11</sup></span>
ח תנא זימון בשלשה מאי זימון אילימא ברכת זימון והתניא זימון וברכת זימון בשלשה וכי תימא פרושי קמפרש מאי זימון ברכת זימון והתניא זימון בשלשה ברכת זימון בשלשה
8 and again, <i>I charged you at that time</i>.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. I, 18. ');"><sup>12</sup></span> R. Eleazar, on the authority of R. Simlai, says: These passages are a warning to the Congregation to revere their judges, and to the judges to bear patiently with the Congregation. To what extent! — R. Hanan, [some say R. Shabatai,] says: <i>As the nursing father carrieth the sucking child.</i><span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. XI, 12. ');"><sup>13</sup></span>
ט אלא מאי זימון אזמוני לדין כי הא דאמר רבא הני בי תלתא דייני דיתבי ואזיל שליחא דבי דינא ואמר מפומא דחד לא אמר כלום עד דאמר משמיה דכולהו הני מילי בלא יומא דדינא אבל ביומא דדינא לית לן בה:
9 One text reads: <i>For thou</i> [Joshua] <i>must go with this people,</i> etc.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XXXI, 7. Where Moses thus places Joshua on an equality with the people. ');"><sup>14</sup></span> And another text says: <i>For thou shalt bring the Children of Israel</i>.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. 23. Where Joshua is declared their leader. ');"><sup>15</sup></span>
י תשלומי כפל כו': שלח ליה רב נחמן בר רב חסדא לרב נחמן בר יעקב ילמדנו רבינו דיני קנסות בכמה מאי קמיבעיא ליה הא אנן תנן בשלשה אלא יחיד מומחה קמיבעיא ליה דאין דיני קנסות או לא
10 R. Johanan said: <i>Thou shalt be like the elders of the generation that are among them</i>.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [So Yad Ramah a.l. ');"><sup>16</sup></span> But the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Joshua: <i>Take a stick and strike them upon their head</i>;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., show your authority. ');"><sup>17</sup></span>
יא אמר ליה תניתוה תשלומי כפל ותשלומי ארבעה וחמשה בשלשה מאי שלשה אילימא שלשה הדיוטות האמר אבוה דאבוך משמיה דרב אפילו עשרה והן הדיוטות פסולין לדיני קנסות אלא מומחין וקאמר שלשה:
11 there is only one leader to a generation not two. A Tanna taught: A summons [<i>Zimmun</i>]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H] Invitation or summons. ');"><sup>18</sup></span>
יב וחכמים אומרים מוציא שם רע בעשרים ושלשה:
12 requires three. What is meant by a summons? Shall I say it means a summons to say Grace after a common meal?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By inviting the guests to join in saying Grace. ');"><sup>19</sup></span> But has it not been already taught that a summons and a summons to Grace need three?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which shows that Zimmun is not identical with Grace said by invitation. ');"><sup>20</sup></span>
יג וכי יש בו דיני נפשות מאי הוי
13 Again, you cannot maintain that they both mean the same thing, the latter phrase merely explaining the earlier [and both referring to a summons to Grace], since it has been taught: A summons needs three, and a summons to Grace needs three [i. e., <i>Zimmun</i> is here particularly specified afresh as requiring three persons] — 'Summons' here, consequently, must mean a summons to appear before Court. As Raba said: When three judges sit in judgment, and the Court messenger, on summoning to Court, conveys the summons in the name of one only, the summons is of no account until he has brought it in the names of all three. This procedure, however, is necessary only on an ordinary day; on a Court-day<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Usually Mondays and Thursdays. ');"><sup>21</sup></span> it is unnecessary. R. Nahman, son of R. Hisda, sent to ask R. Nahman b. Jacob: Would our teacher inform us how many judges are required for the adjudication of cases of <i>Kenas</i>? But what did his question imply? Surely we learnt, THE REPAYMENT OF THE DOUBLE<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which is also Kenas. ');"><sup>22</sup></span>
יד אמר עולא בחוששין ללעז קמיפלגי רבי מאיר סבר אין חוששין ללעז ורבנן סברי חוששין ללעז
14 …&nbsp;… BY THREE. What he meant to ask was whether or not cases of fine may be adjudicated by one <i>Mumheh</i>. R. Nahman b. Jacob said to him: We have learnt, THE REPAYMENT OF DOUBLE OR OF FOUR OR FIVE-FOLD RESTITUTION, BY THREE. Now what kind of persons are these three to be? Shall I say they are commoners? But did not your father's father say, in the name of Rab, that even ten commoners are incompetent to adjudicate cases of fine? Hence it must refer to Mumhin, and even of these, three are required. BUT THE SAGES HOLD THAT A CASE OF LIBEL<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' An accusation made by a husband against his wife, that she was not a virgin at marriage. If adultery is not proved, the accused as a non-virgin, suffers the loss of half the amount payable to her under the Kethubah (see note 4). If the woman is found guilty of adultery during her betrothed state, she is stoned. Hence the dispute in the Mishnah between R. Meir and the Sages. In Talmudic days Betrothal bound the couple as husband and wife, save for cohabitation and minor details. ');"><sup>23</sup></span>
טו רבא אמר כולי עלמא ללעז לא חיישינן והכא בחוששין לכבודן של ראשונים קמיפלגי והב"ע כגון דאיכניף בי עשרין ותלתא למידן דיני נפשות ואיבדור ואמר להו דיינו לי מיהא דיני ממונות
15 REQUIRES A COURT OF TWENTY-THREE, etc. But, even though it may lead to capital punishment, what does it matter? [Since there are no witnesses yet known to be available, to corroborate the husband's suspicion, is it not merely a monetary case, involving only the <i>Kethubah</i>]?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The marriage contract containing, among other things, the settlement on the wife of a minimum of two hundred zuz if she was a virgin, and a hundred zuz if she was not a virgin at marriage. This amount, payable on her husband's death, or on her being divorced, the woman forfeits on a charge of infidelity committed during her betrothed state. (See Keth. 10b, and Rashi and Tosaf. a.l.). ');"><sup>24</sup></span> 'Ulla says that the point of dispute [in the Mishnah between R. Meir and the Sages] is whether we consider seriously the effect of the husband's allegation.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'gossip'. As soon as the charge is made before the Court, the report might be bruited, and witnesses, of whom the husband may be at the moment unaware, may come to support it, the charge thus becoming capital. ');"><sup>25</sup></span> R. Meir does not consider seriously the effect of the allegation — while the Rabbis do. Raba says that all agree that the effect of the allegation need not be seriously considered.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And in the absence of witnesses three judges alone are sufficient. ');"><sup>26</sup></span> They differ, however, as to whether [in cases where the judges have been reduced in number]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. infra. ');"><sup>27</sup></span> the honour of those who retired has to be considered or not. The actual case treated here is where the husband — [having had expectations of supporting his allegation with evidence,] appeared before a court of twenty-three<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As is required for a capital case. ');"><sup>28</sup></span> assembled to judge a capital case. Afterwards, [when he could not produce the required witnesses,] the Court began to disperse, and he then appealed to it that three should remain to decide his monetary claim.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The husband's allegation of non-virginity is accepted by the rabbis even without evidence, in respect of the Kethubah. v. Keth. 10a. ');"><sup>29</sup></span> [The Sages, in order to protect the dignity of those judges who would have left, require them to reassemble, while R. Meir does not hold this view.]