Sanhedrin 63

מתני׳ <big><strong>אחד</strong></big> דיני ממונות ואחד דיני נפשות בדרישה ובחקירה שנאמר (ויקרא כד, כב) משפט אחד יהיה לכם

<b><i>MISHNAH</i></b>. BOTH CIVIL AND CAPITAL CASES DEMAND INQUIRY AND EXAMINATION.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Heb. [H], i.e., examination of witnesses on the main points, e.g., amount (loaned), date and place. ');">¹</span> AS IT IS WRITTEN: YE SHALL HAVE ONE MANNER OF LAW.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXIV, 22. I.e., both capital and monetary cases shall be alike. With regard to capital cases it is written; Then shalt thou inquire and make search (Deut. XIII, 15). ');">²</span>

מה בין דיני ממונות לדיני נפשות דיני ממונות בשלשה ודיני נפשות בעשרים ושלשה דיני ממונות פותחין בין לזכות בין לחובה ודיני נפשות פותחין לזכות ואין פותחין לחובה

WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CIVIL AND CAPITAL CASES? — CIVIL SUITS [ARE TRIED] BY THREE; CAPITAL CASES BY TWENTY-THREE<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra 2a; 23a. ');">³</span> CIVIL SUITS MAY BE OPENED EITHER FOR ACQUITTAL OR CONDEMNATION; CAPITAL CHARGES MUST BE OPENED FOR ACQUITTAL, BUT NOT FOR CONDEMNATION.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The reference is to the judicial debate on the matter. In civil suits, the points in favour of condemnation may be put first; but in capital charges, the arguments for acquittal must be first marshalled, but v. Krauss, a.l. for another interpretation. But of course, it cannot refer to the actual opening of the case; the indictment and case for the prosecution must obviously be stated before there is a charge to answer. ');">⁴</span>

דיני ממונות מטין על פי אחד בין לזכות בין לחובה ודיני נפשות מטין על פי אחד לזכות ועל פי שנים לחובה

CIVIL SUITS MAY BE DECIDED BY A MAJORITY OF ONE, EITHER FOR ACQUITTAL OR CONDEMNATION; WHEREAS CAPITAL CHARGES ARE DECIDED BY A MAJORITY OF ONE FOR ACQUITTAL, BUT [AT LEAST] TWO FOR CONDEMNATION.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra 2a and infra 36b. ');">⁵</span> IN MONETARY CASES THE DECISION MAY BE REVERSED<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On errors being revealed. ');">⁶</span>

דיני ממונות מחזירין בין לזכות בין לחובה דיני נפשות מחזירין לזכות ואין מחזירין לחובה

BOTH FOR A ACQUITTAL AND FOR CONDEMNATION; WHILST IN CAPITAL CHARGES THE VERDICT MAY BE REVERSED FOR ACQUITTAL ONLY, BUT NOT FOR CONDEMNATION; WHILST IN CAPITAL CHARGES THE VERDICT MAY BE REVERSED FOR ACQUITTAL ONLY, BUT NOT FOR CONDEMNATION. IN MONETARY CASES, ALL<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Even the pupils, those seated behind the judges for the purpose of filling up vacancies. Cf. infra 37a. ');">⁷</span> MAY ARGUE FOR OR AGAINST THE DEFENDANT; WHILST IN CAPITAL CHARGES, ANYONE MAY ARGUE IN HIS FAVOUR, BUT NOT AGAINST HIM. IN CIVIL SUITS, HE WHO HAS ARGUED FOR CONDEMNATION, MAY<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On finding his arguments erroneous. ');">⁸</span>

דיני ממונות הכל מלמדין זכות וחובה דיני נפשות הכל מלמדין זכות ואין הכל מלמדין חובה

THEN ARGUE FOR ACQUITTAL, AND VICE VERSA; WHEREAS IN CAPITAL CHARGES, ONE WHO HAS ARGUED FOR CONDEMNATION MAY SUBSEQUENTLY ARGUE FOR ACQUITTAL, BUT NOT VICE VERSA.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' According to Rashi, this is deduced from Num. XXXV, 25, The Congregation shall deliver the manslayer, meaning that all the endeavours of the court should be directed towards deliverance. According to Maim., Yad, Sanh., X, 2, it is deduced from Ex. XXIII, 2, Neither shalt thou speak in a quarrel to incline etc. Probably he based his deduction on the Mekilta comment on the verse, where reference is made to the judges' duty to lean towards acquittal. ');">⁹</span> CIVIL SUITS ARE TRIED BY DAY, AND CONCLUDED AT NIGHT.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where the deliberations have been protracted. ');">¹⁰</span>

דיני ממונות המלמד חובה מלמד זכות והמלמד זכות מלמד חובה דיני נפשות המלמד חובה מלמד זכות אבל המלמד זכות אין יכול לחזור וללמד חובה

BUT CAPITAL CHARGES MUST BE TRIED BY DAY AND CONCLUDED BY DAY. CIVIL SUITS CAN BE CONCLUDED ON THE SAME DAY, WHETHER FOR ACQUITTAL OR CONDEMNATION; CAPITAL CHARGES MAY BE CONCLUDED ON THE SAME DAY WITH A FAVOURABLE VERDICT, BUT ONLY ON THE MORROW WITH AN UNFAVOURABLE VERDICT.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In case points in the accused's favour are discovered during the night. ');">¹¹</span> THEREFORE TRIALS ARE NOT HELD ON THE EVE OF A SABBATH OR FESTIVAL.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since should he be found guilty, the case cannot be concluded on the morrow, execution being forbidden on Sabbaths and Festivals. (From this it is seen that by 'concluding' the actual carrying out of the sentence is meant, not merely the promulgation of the verdict.) Moreover, it is against the law — except in the case of a rebellious Elder, v. infra 89a — to leave judgement in suspense. V. Maim., Yad, Sanh. XII, 4. ');">¹²</span>

דיני ממונות דנין ביום וגומרין בלילה דיני נפשות דנין ביום וגומרין ביום

IN CIVIL SUITS.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' CIVIL SUITS is omitted in most Mishnaic versions. ');">¹³</span> AND IN CASES OF CLEANNESS AND UNCLEANNESS, WE BEGIN WITH [THE OPINION OF] THE MOST EMINENT [OF THE JUDGES]; WHEREAS IN CAPITAL CHARGES, WE COMMENCE WITH [THE OPINION OF] THOSE ON THE SIDE [BENCHES].

דיני ממונות גומרין בו ביום בין לזכות בין לחובה דיני נפשות גומרין בו ביום לזכות וביום שלאחריו לחובה לפיכך אין דנין לא בערב שבת ולא בערב יום טוב

ALL ARE ELIGIBLE TO TRY CIVIL SUITS, BUT NOT ALL ARE ELIGIBLE TO TRY CAPITAL CHARGES, ONLY PRIESTS, LEVITES, AND ISRAELITES [LAYMEN] WITH WHOM PRIESTS CAN ENTER INTO MARRIAGE RELATIONSHIP.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., of pure descent. ');">¹⁴</span> <b><i>GEMARA</i></b>. Do civil suits really need inquiry and examination? The following opposes it: If a bond is dated the first of Nisan in the Shemittah,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H]; Sabbatical year. Though the regulations of the Sabbatical year include also the annulment of all monetary obligations, 'when the creditor is legally debarred from collecting his debt (v. Deut. XV, 2), yet in various exceptional cases the law of Shemittah did not operate, e.g., if a Prosbul ([H]) had been written. This was a legal instrument executed and attested in Court whereby the lender retained the right to collect the debt at any time he thought fit (cf. Sheb. X, 4). Further shemittah does not affect a loan advanced on a pledge, or where the claim for collection had been made before the expiration of the Sabbatical year, in which cases loans are not annulled. V. 'Ar. 28b. ');">¹⁵</span>

דיני ממונות הטמאות והטהרות מתחילין מן הגדול דיני נפשות מתחילין מן הצד

and witnesses came and said: 'How can ye testify to this bond: were ye not with us on that day in such and such a place?' the bond is valid, and its signatories remain competent [witnesses], for we presume that they might merely have postponed writing it.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., they might have witnessed the loan on an earlier date, but have postponed writing the bond until the first day of Nisan (Rashi). [According to Yad Ramah, render, 'they might have post-dated it.' We do not assume that it has been ante-dated (v. infra) as there is a presumption in favour of all duly attested documents, v. B.B. (Sonc. ed.) p. 748, n. 16.] ');">¹⁶</span> Now if you should think that inquiry and examination are necessary, how 'presume that they might merely have postponed writing it?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If such an assumption is permissible, examination as to date and placed is purposeless. ');">¹⁷</span>

הכל כשרין לדון דיני ממונות ואין הכל כשרין לדון דיני נפשות אלא כהנים לוים וישראלים המשיאין לכהונה:

— But on your reasoning, one should object rather to the [following] Mishnah:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Rather than the Baraitha, since scholars are more conversant with the Mishnah than with Baraithoth. ');">¹⁸</span> Ante-dated bonds<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., bearing on the evidence of witnesses, of an earlier date than the actual loan. ');">¹⁹</span>

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> דיני ממונות מי בעינן דרישה וחקירה ורמינהו שטר שזמנו כתוב באחד בניסן בשמיטה ובאו עדים ואמרו היאך אתם מעידין על שטר זה והלא ביום פלוני עמנו הייתם במקום פלוני שטר כשר ועדיו כשרין חיישינן שמא איחרוהו וכתבוהו

of indebtedness are invalid;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As a rule the debtor's property is given as security for the loan, and in the case of default, the creditor may seize it if sold after the loan was incurred, but not before. Hence, if the note was ante-dated, sold property might be seized unlawfully. In order to prevent this, an ante-dated bond was declared altogether invalid, even from the date of transaction. Cf. B.M. 72a. ');">²⁰</span> if post-dated, they are valid.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It appears that the creditor must have renounced his security for the period between the date of the loan and that appearing on the note. ');">²¹</span>

ואי סלקא דעתך בעינן דרישה וחקירה היכי חיישינן שמא איחרוהו וכתבוהו

Now, if you should think that examination and inquiry are necessary, why are post-dated notes valid?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Seeing that they might be mere forgeries? Hence, even if the loan itself is attested as having taken place, it should rank as only a verbal loan, which cannot be collected from property sold even after it was incurred. ');">²²</span> — This<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the fact that the objection is raised on the ground of a Baraitha rather than of a Mishnah. ');">²³</span>

וליטעמיך תיקשי לך מתני' שטרי חוב המוקדמין פסולים והמאוחרים כשרין ואי סלקא דעתך בעינן דרישה וחקירה מאוחרין אמאי כשרין

is no difficulty, for a more powerful objection is raised,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the Baraitha quoted. ');">²⁴</span> viz., that even in the case of a bond dated the first of Nisan in the Sabbatical year, when people, as a rule, do not transact loans, and when, consequently, we cannot [plausibly] say that the writing [of the bond] might have been postponed, since no one would intentionally weaken the validity of his document:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By dating it some time in the Sabbatical year, when the debt is threatened with annulment, and so inevitably arousing the suspicion of forgery. ');">²⁵</span>

הא לא קשיא דעדיפא מינה קאמרינן דאפי' אחד בניסן בשמיטה דלא שכיחי אינשי דמוזפי דליכא למימר שמא איחרוהו וכתבוהו דלא מרע לשטריה אפ"ה כיון דשביעית סופה משמטת מכשרינן

yet since the annulment of debts is effectuated only at the expiration of the Sabbatical year, we declare the bond valid.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By assuming its writing has been postponed to the Sabbatical year. Thus, this assumption, since it is possible, is made in spite of its improbability, a loan in the Sabbatical year still being rare. How much more so is the assumption to be made in normal cases. Why then should the witnesses be examined on the date, since even if it is disproved, their testimony holds good? ');">²⁶</span> At all events, however, the difficulty<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the fact that the Baraitha is contradictory to our Mishnah; v. preceding note. ');">²⁷</span>

מ"מ קשיא: סימן חרפ"ש:

remains. (Mnemonic: <i>HaRPaSH</i>.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 21, n. 5. Here it stands for R. Hanina, Raba, R. Papa, and R. ASHi. the four Rabbis whose views are given here. ');">²⁸</span>

א"ר חנינא דבר תורה אחד דיני ממונות ואחד דיני נפשות בדרישה ובחקירה שנאמר משפט אחד יהיה לכם ומה טעם אמרו דיני ממונות לא בעינן דרישה וחקירה כדי שלא תנעול דלת בפני לוין

) R. Hanina said: By Biblical law, both monetary and capital cases require inquiry and investigation, as it is written: One manner of judgment ye shall have.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXIV, 22. ');">²⁹</span>

אלא מעתה

Why then were civil suits exempted from this procedure? In order not to lock the door against borrowers.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra 2b. The view expressed in our Mishnah was taught before this enactment; and the Baraitha and Mishnah in Sheb., after this enactment. ');">³⁰</span> But if so,