## Sanhedrin Daf 8b

###### Sanhedrin 8b:1
[Sanhedrin 8b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/8b:1)

מֵיתִיבִי: וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, תְּבָעוֹ מָמוֹן – בִּשְׁלֹשָׁה, תְּבָעוֹ נְפָשׁוֹת – בְּעֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁלֹשָׁה. בִּשְׁלָמָא לְרָבָא, תְּבָעוֹ מָמוֹן תְּחִלָּה – בִּשְׁלֹשָׁה, תְּבָעוֹ נְפָשׁוֹת תְּחִלָּה – אֲפִילּוּ מָמוֹן בְּעֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁלֹשָׁה. אֶלָּא לְעוּלָּא קַשְׁיָא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara **raises an objection** from a *baraita* (*Tosefta* 1:2): **And the Rabbis say:** If he took her to court and **claimed money,** the case is to be adjudicated **by three** judges. But if he took her to court and **claimed** that she was liable to receive the **death** penalty, the case must be judged **by twenty-three** judges. **Granted,** according **to Rava,** the *baraita* can be read as referring to the terms of the beginning of the trial: If he **claimed money at the outset,** the case must be judged **by three** judges. Since the case concerns a financial claim, three are sufficient. But if he **initially claimed** she should be subject to the **death** penalty, **even** if the case becomes transformed into **a financial** case, it must be judged **by twenty-three** judges out of concern for their honor. **But** according **to Ulla,** who says the requirement for twenty-three judges is based on concern about rumors, it is **difficult.**


###### Sanhedrin 8b:2
[Sanhedrin 8b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/8b:2)

אָמַר רָבָא: אֲנִי וַאֲרִי שֶׁבַּחֲבוּרָה תַּרְגֵּימְנַהּ. וּמַנּוּ? רַב חִיָּיא בַּר אָבִין. הָכָא בְּמַאי עָסְקִינַן? שֶׁהֵבִיא הַבַּעַל עֵדִים שֶׁזִּינְּתָה, וְהֵבִיא הָאָב עֵדִים וֶהֱזִימּוּם לְעֵדֵי הַבַּעַל. בָּא לִגְבּוֹת מָמוֹן מִבַּעַל – בִּשְׁלֹשָׁה, וּבִמְקוֹם נְפָשׁוֹת – בְּעֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁלֹשָׁה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said: I and the lion of the group** both **explained** this. The Gemara asks: **And who is** the lion of the group? It is **Rav Ḥiyya bar Avin.** He and Rava explained: **With what are we dealing here?** We are dealing with a case **where the husband brought witnesses** to testify **that** the wife **committed adultery, and the** wife’s **father brought witnesses, and** through their testimony that they were with the first witnesses in some other place at the time of the alleged transgression, they **classified the husband’s witnesses** as **conspiring witnesses.** In that case, if the father **comes to collect monetary restitution from the husband** for defamation, the case may be adjudicated **by three** judges. **And in** a case of **capital punishment,** such as the trial of the husband’s witnesses, the case must be judged **by twenty-three** judges. In this way, Ulla’s interpretation may be reconciled with the *Tosefta*.


###### Sanhedrin 8b:3
[Sanhedrin 8b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/8b:3)

אַבָּיֵי אָמַר: דְּכוּלֵּי עָלְמָא חָיְישִׁינַן לְלַעַז, וּמִשּׁוּם כְּבוֹדָן שֶׁל רִאשׁוֹנִים. הָכָא בְּמַאי עָסְקִינַן? כְּגוֹן דְּאַתְרוֹ בַּהּ סְתָם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye said:** The dispute between Rabbi Meir and the Rabbis can be explained in another manner. According to **everyone,** one need be **concerned for rumors, and** also **for the honor of the first** judges. And with regard to the dispute between Rabbi Meir and the Rabbis, **here we are dealing with** a case **where** the witnesses to the adultery **warned her** that adultery is a capital transgression **without specification** as to the exact manner of death penalty she would receive.


###### Sanhedrin 8b:4
[Sanhedrin 8b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/8b:4)

וְהַאי תַּנָּא הוּא, דְּתַנְיָא: וּשְׁאָר כׇּל חַיָּיבֵי מִיתוֹת שֶׁבַּתּוֹרָה, אֵין מְמִיתִין אוֹתָם אֶלָּא בְּעֵדָה וְעֵדִים וְהַתְרָאָה, וְעַד שֶׁיּוֹדִיעוּהוּ שֶׁהוּא חַיָּיב מִיתָה בְּבֵית דִּין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** the matter **is** in accordance with **this *tanna*,** whose statement follows: **As it is taught** in a *baraita*: With regard to **all the others,** those who are **liable for** the various **death penalties** stated **in the Torah** other than the inciter to idol worship, the court **executes them only when** the following elements are present: **The congregation,** represented by the court; **and witnesses; and forewarning** just before the defendant commits the transgression. **And** the court does not execute him **unless** the witnesses had **informed** the defendant **that he is liable** to receive **the death penalty from** the **court.**


###### Sanhedrin 8b:5
[Sanhedrin 8b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/8b:5)

רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: עַד שֶׁיּוֹדִיעוּהוּ בְּאֵיזֹה מִיתָה הוּא נֶהֱרָג.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Yehuda says:** The defendant is not executed **unless** the witnesses had **informed** the defendant **by which** form of the **death** penalty **he is** to be **killed.** According to the opinion of Abaye, the dispute in the mishna involves a case in which it was known that the witnesses forewarned the woman, but they did not specify the specific death penalty she would be liable to receive. In this case, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, Rabbi Meir holds there can be no death penalty, and therefore the case may be tried by three judges.


###### Sanhedrin 8b:6
[Sanhedrin 8b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/8b:6)

רַב פָּפָּא אָמַר: הָכָא בְּאִשָּׁה חֲבֵירָה עָסְקִינַן, וְקָמִיפַּלְגִי בִּפְלוּגְתָּא דְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי בַּר יְהוּדָה וְרַבָּנַן. דְּתַנְיָא, רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בַּר יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: חָבֵר אֵין צָרִיךְ הַתְרָאָה, לְפִי שֶׁלֹּא נִיתְּנָה הַתְרָאָה אֶלָּא לְהַבְחִין בֵּין שׁוֹגֵג לְמֵזִיד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Pappa said** a similar explanation: **Here we are dealing with a woman** who is **a *ḥaveira*,** meaning that she is knowledgeable with regard to Torah matters. **And they disagree with regard to** the issue that is the subject of **the dispute between Rabbi Yosei bar Yehuda and the Rabbis. As it is taught** in a *baraita*: **Rabbi Yosei bar Yehuda says: A *ḥaver*,** as he is knowledgeable in Torah, **does not need** to be issued **a forewarning** by the witnesses, **because forewarning is given only to distinguish between unintentional** sin **and intentional** sin, and in the case of a *ḥaver* it is clear that he is aware of the *halakha*. The Rabbis maintain that even a *ḥaver* may not be punished unless he has been forewarned. Rav Pappa suggests that Rabbi Meir holds that a *ḥaveira* must be forewarned, and the mishna discussed a case where this forewarning did not take place, and consequently the trial of her alleged defamer could not lead to capital punishment.


###### Sanhedrin 8b:7
[Sanhedrin 8b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sanhedrin/r/8b:7)

רַב אָשֵׁי אָמַר: כְּגוֹן

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Ashi says** a different explanation: The dispute in the mishna concerns a case **where**