Home About Network of subjects Linked subjects heatmap Book indices included Search by subject Search by reference Browse subjects Browse texts

Tiresias: The Ancient Mediterranean Religions Source Database



10968
Tosefta, Sanhedrin, 3.4
NaN


Intertexts (texts cited often on the same page as the searched text):

3 results
1. Mishnah, Sanhedrin, 1.5, 2.4-2.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

1.5. A tribe, a false prophet, or the high priest may not be tried save by the court of seventy-one; They may not send forth the people to wage a battle of free choice save by the decision of the court of one and seventy; They may not add to the City [of Jerusalem], or the Courts of the Temple save by the decision of the court of seventy-one; They may not set up sanhedrins for the several tribes save by the decision of the court of one and seventy. And they may not proclaim [any city to be] an Apostate City (ir ha-niddahat) (Deut. 13:13–19] save by the decision of one and seventy. No city on the frontier may be proclaimed an Apostate City, nor three together, but only one or two." 2.4. He may send forth the people to a battle waged of free choice by the decision of the court of seventy one. He may break through [the private domain of any man] to make himself a road and none may protest him. The king’s road has no limit. Whatsoever the people take in plunder they must place before him, and he may take first. “And he shall not have many wives” (Deut. 17:17) eighteen only. Rabbi Judah says: “He may take many wives provided they don’t turn his heart away [from worshipping God]. Rabbi Shimon says: “Even one that might turn his heart away, he should not marry. Why then does it say, “He shall not have many wives”, even if they are like Avigayil. “He shall not keep many horses” (Deut. 17:16) enough for his chariot only. “Nor shall he amass silver and gold to excess” (Deut. 17:17) enough to pay his soldier’s wages. He must write a Torah scroll for himself; when he goes forth to battle he shall take it with him, and when he returns he shall bring it back with him; when he sits in judgement it shall be with him, and when he sits to eat it shall be with him, as it says, “Let it remain with him and let him read it all his life” (Deut. 17:19)" 2.5. None may ride his horse and none may sit on his throne and none may make use of his scepter. No one may see him when his hair is being cut or when he is naked or when he is in the bath house, for it says, “You shall set a king upon yourself” (Deut. 17:15) that his awe should be over you."
2. Tosefta, Sanhedrin, 4.1-4.2, 4.10, 11.7 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

3. Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

32b. טעו לא ישלמו כל שכן שתנעול דלת בפני לווין,רבא אמר מתניתין דהכא בדיני קנסות ואידך בהודאות והלואות,רב פפא אמר אידי ואידי בהודאה והלואה כאן בדין מרומה כאן בדין שאינו מרומה,כדריש לקיש דריש לקיש רמי כתיב (ויקרא יט, טו) בצדק תשפוט עמיתך וכתיב (דברים טז, כ) צדק צדק תרדף הא כיצד כאן בדין מרומה כאן בדין שאין מרומה,רב אשי אמר מתני׳ כדשנין קראי אחד לדין וא' לפשרה,כדתניא צדק צדק תרדף אחד לדין ואחד לפשרה כיצד שתי ספינות עוברות בנהר ופגעו זה בזה אם עוברות שתיהן שתיהן טובעות בזה אחר זה שתיהן עוברות וכן שני גמלים שהיו עולים במעלות בית חורון ופגעו זה בזה אם עלו שניהן שניהן נופלין בזה אחר זה שניהן עולין,הא כיצד טעונה ושאינה טעונה תידחה שאינה טעונה מפני טעונה קרובה ושאינה קרובה תידחה קרובה מפני שאינה קרובה היו שתיהן קרובות שתיהן רחוקות הטל פשרה ביניהן ומעלות שכר זו לזו,ת"ר צדק צדק תרדף הלך אחר ב"ד יפה אחר רבי אליעזר ללוד אחר רבן יוחנן בן זכאי לברור חיל,תנא קול ריחים בבורני שבוע הבן שבוע הבן אור הנר בברור חיל משתה שם משתה שם,ת"ר צדק צדק תרדף הלך אחר חכמים לישיבה אחר ר' אליעזר ללוד אחר רבן יוחנן בן זכאי לברור חיל אחר רבי יהושע לפקיעין אחר רבן גמליאל ליבנא אחר רבי עקיבא לבני ברק אחר רבי מתיא לרומי אחר רבי חנניא בן תרדיון לסיכני אחר ר' יוסי לציפורי אחר רבי יהודה בן בתירה לנציבין אחר רבי יהושע לגולה אחר רבי לבית שערים אחר חכמים ללשכת הגזית:,דיני ממונות פותחין כו': היכי אמרינן אמר רב יהודה הכי אמרינן להו מי יימר כדקאמריתו,א"ל עולא והא חסמינן להו וליחסמו מי לא תניא רבי שמעון בן אליעזר אומר מסיעין את העדים ממקום למקום כדי שתיטרף דעתן ויחזרו בהן,מי דמי התם ממילא קא מידחו הכא קא דחינן להו בידים,אלא אמר עולא הכי אמרינן יש לך עדים להזימם א"ל רבה וכי פותחין בזכותו של זה שהיא חובתו של זה,ומי הויא חובתו והתנן אין עדים זוממין נהרגין עד שיגמר הדין,הכי אמינא אילו שתיק האי עד דמיגמר דיניה ומייתי עדים ומזים להו הויא ליה חובתו של זה אלא אמר רבה אמרינן ליה יש לך עדים להכחישן,רב כהנא אמר מדבריכם נזדכה פלוני אביי ורבא דאמרי תרוייהו אמרי' ליה אי לא קטלת לא תדחל רב אשי אמר כל מי שיודע לו זכות יבא וילמד עליו,תניא כוותיה דאביי ורבא רבי אומר (במדבר ה, יט) אם לא שכב איש אותך ואם לא שטית וגו' 32b. then if the judges berred they should notneed to bpaythe party they wronged, as they can claim that they were prevented from examining the witnesses effectively. The Gemara answers: If that were to be the ihalakha /i, ball the more so thatthis bwould lock the door in the face ofpotential bborrowers.If people know that the courts are not responsible for an error in judgment, they will not be willing to lend money., bRava says:The ruling of bthe mishna here,that cases of monetary law require inquiry and interrogation, is stated bwith regard to laws of fines,not standard cases of monetary law. bAnd the othersources, i.e., the mishna in tractate iShevi’itand the ibaraita /i, which do not require inquiry and interrogation, are stated bwith regard tocases of badmissions and loans,in which there is cause to relax the procedures of deliberation, as explained., bRav Pappa says: This and that,i.e., both the mishna here and the other sources, are stated bwith regard tocases of ban admission and a loan.The distinction between them is that the mishna bhere,which rules that cases of monetary law require inquiry and interrogation, is stated bwith regard toa possibly bfraudulent trial,where the court suspects that one party is attempting to defraud the other party and have witnesses offer false testimony on his own behalf. bThere,in the ibaraitaand in the mishna in tractate iShevi’it /i, which do not require inquiry and interrogation, the ruling is stated bwith regard to a trial thatdoes bnotappear bfraudulent. /b,This distinction is bin accordance withthe statement bof Reish Lakish, as Reish Lakish raises a contradictionbetween two verses: It bis writtenin one verse: b“In justice shall you judge your neighbor”(Leviticus 19:15), bandit bis writtenin another verse: b“Justice, justice, shall you follow”(Deuteronomy 16:21), with the repetition indicating that it is not enough to merely judge with justice. He continues: bHowcan bthesetexts be reconciled? bHere,this latter verse is stated bwith regard toa possibly bfraudulent trial,where the court must take extra care to judge with justice; and bthere,that former verse is stated bwith regard to a trial thatdoes bnotappear bfraudulent. /b, bRav Ashi says:The ruling of bthe mishna here,that cases of monetary law require inquiry and interrogation, is bas we answered,i.e., in accordance with any one of the answers offered by the other iamora’im /i. And those bverseswere not stated with regard to fraudulent trials; rather, boneis stated bwith regard to judgment,in which the court must pursue justice extensively, band oneis stated bwith regard to compromise. /b, bAs it is taughtin a ibaraita /i: When the verse states: b“Justice, justice, shall you follow,” onemention of “justice” is stated bwith regard to judgment and oneis stated bwith regard to compromise. How so?Where there are btwo boats traveling on the river and they encounter each other, if both of themattempt to bpass, both of them sink,as the river is not wide enough for both to pass. If they pass bone after the other, both of them pass. And similarly,where there are btwo camels who were ascending the ascent of Beit Ḥoron,where there is a narrow steep path, band they encounter each other, if both of themattempt to bascend, both of them fall.If they ascend bone after the other, both of them ascend. /b, bHowdoes one decide which of them should go first? If there is one boat that is bladen andone boat bthat is not laden,the needs of the one bthat is not laden should be overridden due tothe needs of the one bthat is laden.If there is one boat that is bcloseto its destination bandone boat bthat is not closeto its destination, the needs of the one that is bclose should be overridden due tothe needs of the one bthat is not close.If bboth of them were closeto their destinations, or bboth of them were farfrom their destinations, bimpose a compromise between themto decide which goes first, bandthe owners of the boats bpay a fee to one other,i.e., the owners of the first boat compensate the owner of the boat that waits, for any loss incurred.,§ bThe Sages taught:The verse states: b“Justice, justice, shall you follow.”This teaches that one should bfollow the best,most prestigious, bcourtof the generation. For example, follow bafter Rabbi Eliezer to Lod, after Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai to Beror Ḥayil. /b,The Sages btaught:When the gentile authorities issued decrees outlawing observance of the mitzvot, members of Jewish communities devised clandestine ways of indicating observance of mitzvot to each other. For example: If one produces bthe sound of a millstone inthe city called bBurni,this is tantamount to announcing: bWeek of the son, week of the son,i.e., there will be a circumcision. If one displays the blight of a lamp inthe city called bBeror Ḥayil,this is tantamount to announcing: There is a wedding bfeast there,there is a wedding bfeast there. /b, bThe Sages taught:The verse states: b“Justice, justice, shall you follow.”This teaches that one should bfollow the Sages to the academywhere they are found. For example, follow bafter Rabbi Eliezer to Lod, after Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai to Beror Ḥayil, after Rabbi Yehoshua to Peki’in, after Rabban Gamliel to Yavne, after Rabbi Akiva to Bnei Brak, after Rabbi Matya to Rome [ iRomi /i], after Rabbi Ḥaya ben Teradyon to Sikhnei, after Rabbi Yosei to Tzippori, after Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira to Netzivin, after Rabbi Yehoshua to the exile [ igola /i],i.e., Babylonia, bafter RabbiYehuda HaNasi bto Beit She’arim,and bafter the Sagesin the time of the Temple bto the Chamber of Hewn Stone. /b,§ The mishna teaches that in cases of bmonetary law,the court bopensthe deliberations either with a claim to exempt the accused, or with a claim to find him liable. In cases of capital law, the court opens the deliberations with a claim to acquit the accused, but does not open the deliberations with a claim to find him liable. The Gemara asks: bHow do we saythis opening stage of the deliberations? In other words, with what claim does the court begin deliberating? bRav Yehuda said: We say this tothe witnesses: bWho saysthat the event occurred bas you said?Perhaps you erred?, bUlla said to him: Butby confronting the witnesses in this manner, bwe silence them.The witnesses will think that the court suspects them of lying, and they will not testify. Rav Yehuda said to him: bAnd let them be silenced. Isn’t it taughtin a ibaraita( iTosefta9:1): bRabbi Shimon ben Eliezer says:In cases of capital law, the court bbrings the witnesses fromone bplace toanother bplace in order to confuse them so that they will retracttheir testimony if they are lying.,The Gemara rejects this argument: bArethe ihalakhot bcomparable? There,where Rabbi Shimon ben Eliezer says to bring the witnesses from place to place, the witnesses bare repressed by themselves,whereas bhere, we repress them bydirect baction,and that the court should not do., bRather, Ulla says: We say thisto the accused: bDo you have witnesses to determinethat the witnesses who testified against you are bconspiring witnesses? Rabba said to him: But do we openthe deliberations bwitha claim to bacquitthe accused bthat isto bthe liability of thisone, i.e., the witnesses? This claim can lead to the witnesses incurring liability for their testimony.,The Gemara questions Rabba’s assumption: bBut isthis to bthe liability ofthe witnesses? bBut didn’t we learnin a mishna ( iMakkot5b): bConspiring witnesses are not killedfor their testimony buntil the verdictof the one concerning whom they testified bis issued?Therefore, if they will be shown to be conspiring witnesses at this early stage of the proceedings, they will not be liable.,The Gemara restates Rabba’s objection: bThisis what bI say: Ifthe accused bwould be silent until his verdict is issued andthen bbrings witnesses andthe court bdetermines themto be bconspiringwitnesses, it will be found that the statement of the court bisto bthe liability of thisone, i.e., the witnesses. bRather, Rabba says: We say tothe accused: bDo you have witnesses to contradict them?If the first witnesses are contradicted as to the facts of the case, no one is liable., bRav Kahana said:We say to the witnesses: bBased on your statements, so-and-so is acquitted.The court issues a ipro formadeclaration that it is possible to find a reason to acquit based on the testimony of the witnesses, and then they begin the deliberations. bAbaye and Rava both say: We say tothe accused: For example, bif you did not killanyone, bdo not fearthe consequences of these proceedings, as you will be acquitted. bRav Ashi says:The court announces: bWhoever knowsof a reason bto acquitthe accused bshould come and teachthis reason bconcerning him. /b,The Gemara comments: bIt is taughtin a ibaraita bin accordance withthe explanation bof Abaye and Rava. RabbiYehuda HaNasi bsays:The priest administering the isotarite to the isotasays to her: b“If no man has lain with you and if you have not gone astrayto impurity while under your husband, you shall be free from this water of bitterness that causes the curse. But if you have gone astray while under your husband…” (Numbers 5:19–20). The priest first states the scenario in which the woman is innocent of adultery.


Subjects of this text:

subject book bibliographic info
essenes Heo, Images of Torah: From the Second-Temple Period to the Middle Ages (2023) 42
lorberbaum, yair Flatto, The Crown and the Courts (2021) 295
mishnah sanhedrin Flatto, The Crown and the Courts (2021) 116, 117
pharisees Heo, Images of Torah: From the Second-Temple Period to the Middle Ages (2023) 42
qumran literature on, tannaitic literature Flatto, The Crown and the Courts (2021) 116, 117
rabbi ismael, mishnah sanhedrin Flatto, The Crown and the Courts (2021) 116, 117
rabbi ismael, royalty and judicial authority in Flatto, The Crown and the Courts (2021) 116, 117
sanhedrin Flatto, The Crown and the Courts (2021) 116, 117; Heo, Images of Torah: From the Second-Temple Period to the Middle Ages (2023) 42
tannaitic literature alternative juridical models, kingship and law in Flatto, The Crown and the Courts (2021) 116, 117
yeshiva' Heo, Images of Torah: From the Second-Temple Period to the Middle Ages (2023) 42