MISHNAH: Money matters¹ 8:7). are judged by three [judges]; robberies² and injuries³ by three [judges], damages⁴, half damages⁵ 1:4–5)., double restitution⁶ 7:1. The thief of livestock pays quadruple or quintuple restitution. quadruple and quintuple restitution. The rapist⁷ 4:1)., the seducer⁸, and the calumniator⁹ 22:13–19). are judged by three [judges], the words of Rebbi Meïr; but the Sages say that the calumniator is judged by 23 because it might be a capital case¹⁰ 22:20–21) and the biblical text implies that the court which might sentence the husband to a fine is the one which might pass a death sentence, the case has to be tried in a tribunal empowered to try capital cases. According to rabbinic principles, *Deut.*22:13–21 cannot refer to a husband accusing his wife of not being a virgin since 1° by marriage, the husband became his wife’s relative and relatives are barred from appearing as witnesses; his case could not be heard. 2° there is no verse threatening a woman with death if she married when not a virgin. Therefore, the rabbinic interpretation of the paragraph is that the husband presents witnesses to the fact that his wife committed adultery while preliminarily married to him. A preliminarily married woman is married in respect to criminal but not civil law (cf. Introduction to Tractate Qiddušin). Another aspect of criminal law in this case is the law of perjury, Deut. 19:18–19. Since the husband’s witnesses intended to have the woman stoned, if they are shown to be perjured they themselves are stoned. Therefore, the case may be heard only in a court competent to impose death sentences..

footnotes: ¹ Not only litigation involving loans, inheritances, gifts, or real estate, but also distribution of public funds (cf. Mishnah Peah ² Including fraud. ³ Inflicted on humans. ⁴ Caused on living or inanimate property. ⁵ Caused by somebody’s animals (cf. Mishnaiot Bava qamma ⁶ To be paid by the thief of inanimate objects, Mishnah Bava qamma ⁷ Who has to pay under four different categories (Mishnah Ketubot ⁸ Who has to pay under three different categories. ⁹ Who accuses his wife not to have been a virgin (Deut. ¹⁰ Since the woman is stoned if the husband’s accusation is proved correct (Deut.

HALAKHAH: “Money matters are judged by three [judges],” etc. From where comes this? These shall be the laws of procedure to you,¹¹ 35:29. The chapter covers the rules of levitic cities, laws of property, and of the homicide, criminal law. I would say that both civil cases and criminal cases are subject to the rules of verification and examination¹² refers to cross-examination relating to questions which answer to “who”, “when”, and “where”. Interrogation refers to answers to “how”. The distinction between the two is in regard to rules about discrepancies in testimony between different witnesses, Mishnah 5:1. The verse makes it clear that the rules also apply to lawsuits about subjects not covered by the detailed list in the Mishnah..

footnotes: ¹¹ Num. ¹² Mishnah 4:1. Examination

¹³ From where that civil cases are heard by three [judges]? The owner shall go to the judge,¹⁴. 22:7. he added here one judge. Before the judge,¹⁵. 22:8. these are two. Whom the judges will find guilty, these are three¹⁶ three times., the words of Rebbi Joshia. Rebbi Jonathan said, the first mention introduces the subject; one does not infer anything from introductions¹⁷.). The expression which introduces a subject always is necessary and cannot be considered additional or extraneous to the subject at hand.. But before the judge, there is one. Whom the judges will find guilty, there are two. No court may be even-numbered,¹⁸ so one adds another one; this makes three.

footnotes: ¹³ Babli 3b. ¹⁴ Ex ¹⁵ Ex ¹⁶ Since the paragraph mentions judge ¹⁷ This is a generally accepted principle (Babli loc. cit ¹⁸ The duty of the court is to decide matters based on incomplete information. The possibility of a deadlock would defeat the purpose for which the court was convened. Therefore, no court may be even-numbered. If any of the judges did abstain from voting, the case would have to be tried anew with another judge substituting for the abstaining judge.

Rebbi said, the verse speaks about two. You say about two, or maybe it is only about one? What He said, it is not written “whom the judge will find guilty” but whom the judges will find guilty.¹⁹ No court may be even-numbered, so one adds another one; this makes three.

footnotes: ¹⁹ The plural in this sentence alone implies that at least two judges are involved.

Rebbi Abbahu asked. According to Rebbi²⁰, should not civil suits be heard by five; should sentence not be passed by 23²¹ 35:29 be interpreted as requiring identical procedural law for both civil and criminal cases?? It was found stated by (Rebbi)²² The fourth generation Rebbi Hizqiah would be much too late. The baraita is found in both Mekhiltot (dR. Ismael, ed. Horovitz-Rabin p. 323, dR. Simeon ben Iohai ed. Epstein-Melamed p. 214.) Ḥizqiah: Since the Torah said, kill by a vote of the majority²³ 23:2: “to bend after the many.” The same verse forbids a guilty verdict by a simple majority: “Do not follow the majority in bad things.” Since the plural used for “many” implies at least two, it follows that a guilty verdict by a majority of one is an acquittal, while by a majority of two it is a guilty verdict., kill by the testimony of witnesses. Since witnesses must be two²⁴ 23:2 for criminal cases only., a majority also must be two²⁴ 23:2 for criminal cases only.. No court can be even-numbered; one adds another one. This makes five.

footnotes: ²⁰ Who in Tosephta 1:1 requires five judges to hear civil cases. ²¹ Rebbi probably also will agree that common practice was to hear cases by a panel of three judges. If one already deviates from traditional practice, should not Num. ²² Probably one should read דבי instead of (רבי) ר׳ and translate “the House of Hizqiah,” referring to one of the twin sons of the Elder Rebbi Hiyya, known as the last person who formulated baraitot. ²³ Majority rule for judicial sentences is introduced in Ex. ²⁴ Since unanimity is not required, the court would have to be composed of at least 4, hence 5, members. The majority accepts this interpretation of Ex. ²⁴ Since unanimity is not required, the court would have to be composed of at least 4, hence 5, members. The majority accepts this interpretation of Ex.

Do not robberies and injuries fall under the same rules²⁶? It was found that Rebbi Simeon ben Ioḥai stated: These are the procedures which you shall put before them. It serves to explain to you the plain sense of the verse²⁷. 21:1. As in Ex. 21–23, pure money matters are treated first, then torts. The order of the Mishnah follows the order of topics in these chapters.. This follows Rebbi Yose bar Ḥalaphta.

footnotes: ²⁶ The same question is asked in the Babli, 2b. In contrast to the Babli, here it is understood that torts do not necessarily follow the same rules as disputes over money, and it is not obvious that a panel of three judges would be sufficient for these. ²⁷ Ex

Rebbi Yose bar Ḥalaphta, when two people came before him for judgment and told him, “on condition that you judge us by the law of the Torah,” told them, “the law of the Torah I do not know²⁸, but He Who knows thoughts should collect from those people²⁹. You have to accept what I shall tell you.”

footnotes: ²⁸ He knew the theoretical law of the Torah but not necessarily the application to the case before him, since that would have presumed perfect and complete information. But the judge, by biblical decree, is dependent on what is told him in court. The information given to him by necessity is incomplete. ²⁹ Who either lie in court or withhold information.

When a person came to Rebbi Aqiba to have a suit decided before him, he told him: “You should know before Whom you are standing, before Him Who commanded and the world came into existence, as it is said: *The two people who are quarrelling shall stand before the Eternal,*³⁰ 19:17. The verse continues: “before the priests and the judges.” not before Aqiba ben Joseph.”

footnotes: ³⁰ Deut.

It was stated³¹ is in 7:2; the first part is also quoted in the Babli, Šabbat 15a. The second part never applied in Babylonia.: Forty years before the Temple was destroyed, criminal jurisdiction was removed from Israel³², and in the days of Simeon ben (Šetaḥ)³³ civil jurisdiction was removed. Rebbi Simeon ben Ioḥai said, praised be the Merciful³⁴, for I am not intelligent enough to judge³⁵.

footnotes: ³¹ The correct version of this baraita ³² When Judea came under direct Roman rule. ³³ One has to read with 7:2: Simeon ben Iohai, as confirmed by the next sentence. The removal of civil cases to Roman courts cannot be dated to the reign of Alexander Yannai, Simeon ben Shetah’s brother-in-law, but to Hadrian, in the aftermath of the war of bar Kokhba. ³⁴ For preventing me to have to act as a judge. ³⁵ From his time on, rabbinic jurisdiction in Palestine was limited to courts of arbitration which are not representatives of God and therefore under less pressure to render absolutely correct judgment.

Samuel said, if two men acted as judges, their judgment stands, but they are called an insolent court³⁶ 22a. Cf. Berakhot 7:1, Note 18.. Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish both are instructing: Even³⁷ if two men acted as judges, their judgment is no judgment³⁸. There, we have stated³⁹ 4:4. The Mishnah refers to a person who did not pass the required examinations and was not formally qualified as a judge.: “If he rendered judgment, acquitted the guilty and condemned the innocent, declared the pure impure or the impure pure, what he did is done but he has to pay from his own pocket.” Rebbi Abba in the name of Rebbi Abbahu: if they told him, we accept you as if you were two⁴⁰. What are we dealing with? If his error was that he judged them on his discretion⁴¹, then what he did is done. If his error was that he judged them by Torah law⁴² 9:2, Note 100). If any money changed hands as a consequence of the erroneous judgment, it has to be returned., why should he pay from his own pocket? Rebbi Abba in the name of Rebbi Abbahu: if they told him, we accept you as if you were three on condition that you judge us by Torah law. He erred and judged them on his discretion. What he did is done, but since he erred and judged them on his discretion, he has to pay from his own pocket⁴³ because he was presumptuous to judge alone by Torah law, as we have stated⁴⁴ 4:8.: “Do not judge sitting alone, for only One judges sitting alone.”

footnotes: ³⁶ Babli 3a,5b,30a,87b; Ketubot ³⁷ Even if the parties accepted them as judges. ³⁸ In the Babli, this opinion is represented by Rava (5b) and R. Abbahu (87b), the student of R. Johanan and R. Simeon ben Laqish. ³⁹ Mishnah Bekhorot ⁴⁰ Since R. Abbahu follows his teachers and holds that any judgment passed by a court of two judges is void, as well as from the following quote, it is clear that one has to read “three” in place of “two”. ⁴¹ If there exists no clear precedent for the case; different schools promulgate different rules and he followed a minority opinion because it seemed to him to be the correct one, his judgment is valid but there is no reason why he should have to pay. The Babli, 33a, declares a judgment against a clear majority of opinions as an error in law. ⁴² If his judgment contradicted a Mishnah or a clear precedent, in Israel a judgment of the Patriarch’s court or in Babylonia a concurrent judgment of both Yeshivot, his judgment is void (cf. Ketubot ⁴³ As a fine. ⁴⁴ Mishnah Avot

Rebbi Jehudah ben Pazi said, even the Holy One, praise to Him, does not judge alone, as it is said⁴⁵ 22:19. In MT, “was standing.”: all the hosts of Heaven were standing by Him, to His right side and to His left. These vote to acquit, those to convict. Even though He does not judge alone, He signs alone, as it is said: *really I shall tell you what is noted in true writing.*⁴⁶ 10:21. Rebbi Joḥanan said, the Holy One, praise to Him, never does anything in His world unless He took counsel with the Heavenly Court⁴⁷. What is the reason? *True is the statement and a large host.*⁴⁸ 10:1. When is the seal of the Holy One, praise to Him, true? When He took counsel with the Heavenly Court. Rebbi Eleazar said, any place where it is said “the Eternal, Almighty,⁴⁹ 24(2) in the name of R. Eliezer, in Num. rabba 3(3) in the name of “the rabbis”: Any place where it is said “and the Eternal.” Since the verse quoted in support refers to this version, the editor of the Žitomir-Wilna edition changed the text here. It is more likely that the text originally read “the Eternal of hosts” and the proof text was Jer. 11:17.” it is He and His Heavenly Court. The paradigm of all is: *and the Eternal spoke evil about him.*⁵⁰ 22:23.

footnotes: ⁴⁵ 1K. ⁴⁶ Dan. ⁴⁷ Babli 38b. ⁴⁸ Dan. ⁴⁹ In Lev. rabba ⁵⁰ 1K.

What is the seal of the Holy One, praise to Him? Rebbi Bevai in the name of Rebbi Reuben, “true.⁵¹ 55a, in the name of R. Hanina, a midrash on 1K. 22:23.” What means “true”? Rebbi Abun said, that He is a Living Power and the King of this World. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, א is the start of the alphabet, מ the middle,⁵² and ת the end. To say, *I, the Eternal, am First,*⁵³ 41:4. I did not receive anything from another. Besides Me there is no supreme power,⁵⁴ 44:6. The verse probably should have been quoted three times. for I have no co-owner. And with the last, I shall be,⁵³ 41:4. I shall not in the future turn it over to anybody else.

footnotes: ⁵¹ Babli Šabbat ⁵² Since the Hebrew alphabet has 22 letters, the middle is between the 11th (k) and the twelfth (l) letter. ⁵³ Is. ⁵⁴ Is. ⁵³ Is.

Rebbi Abba and Rebbi Benjamin bar Jephet had a lawsuit before Rebbi Isaac; the judgment was for Rebbi Benjamin. Rebbi Abba wanted to complain⁵⁵; Rebbi Immi came and taught: If an expert⁵⁶ forced his opinion as a judgment, his judgment stands.

footnotes: ⁵⁵ After the fact, he wanted to invalidate the judgment because R. Isaac sat as sole judge. ⁵⁶ A person who passed the required examinations and was ordained as a judge, in Palestine by the Patriarch, in Babylonia by the Head of the Diaspora.

Rebbi Abbahu was sitting as sole judge in the inclining⁵⁷ synagogue of Caesarea. His students said to him, did the rabbi not teach⁴⁴ 4:8.: “Do not judge sitting alone”? He told them, since you see me sitting alone as a judge and they come to me, it is because they accepted this. It was stated thus⁵⁸ 25b.: “When was this said? If they did not accept it. But if they accepted it, he even judges as sole judge.⁵⁹”

footnotes: ⁵⁷ A synagogue built on an incline in his hometown of Caesarea Philippi on the slopes of the Golan Heights. ⁴⁴ Mishnah Avot ⁵⁸ Babli 5a, Rosh Haššanah ⁵⁹ Since he is acting as an arbitrator.

Rebbi Joḥanan went with a lawsuit before the Elder Rebbi Ḥiyya. He took a student to sit with him. But did we not state: “A father and his son, a teacher and his student, the two are counted as one.⁶⁰” Let us say that he was both student and colleague, like Rebbi Eleazar to Rebbi Joḥanan⁶¹.

footnotes: ⁶⁰ Tosephta 7:2; Babli 36a. The son or the student cannot be counted on for an independent opinion. ⁶¹ Where both Talmudim report many disagreements between them. At this stage, the former student will have independent opinions and, more importantly, will not be afraid publicly to state them.

Judgments were rendered by Rav alone, by Rav Aḥa alone, by Rebbi Jonah and Rebbi Yose by themselves⁶².

footnotes: ⁶² The head of a Talmudic Academy everywhere is empowered to sit as sole judge.

There, we have stated⁶³ 4:6, Babli Bekhorot29a, Ketubot 105a, Qiddušin 58b.: “If somebody takes a fee to judge, his judgments⁶⁴ are invalid.” So is the Mishnah: “He who is suspected of taking a fee⁶⁵ but he judges.”

footnotes: ⁶³ Mishnah Bekhorot ⁶⁴ The plural implies that all his judgments are invalid, even those for which he did not take money. ⁶⁵ It takes an action of a supervising authority to invalidate his judgments.

A person brought a suit before Rav Huna⁶⁶ 105a., He told him, bring me a person who climbs the date palm instead of me.

footnotes: ⁶⁶ Who started out poor as an agricultural worker and only became rich when middle aged. Babli Ketubot

Rav Huna was a cowherd when he knew testimony for a person, who told him, come and testify for me. He answered him, give me my wages. It was stated thus: “One pays the judge for his time and the witness for his testimony.

A person made a Cohen impure⁶⁷ 1:1, Note 3.. The case came before Rebbi Isaac who made him eat profane food⁶⁸ which according to the Babli, Gittin 53a, can be punished only by a rabbinic fine. According to the Babli, Sanhedrin 8a, fines can be imposed only by a panel of three ordained judges. Since it is implied here that R. Isaac was sitting as sole judge, the Yerushalmi strongly disagrees with the Babli. (Cf. Bava qamma 9:2, Note 24.). They wanted to say that one deducts the price of heave from the amount⁶⁹.

footnotes: ⁶⁷ He made it impossible for him to eat heave, which must be eaten in purity. One has to assume that the impurity was that of corpses, which can be dissolved only by sprinkling with water containing the ashes of the red cow, which at that moment had become unavailable; cf. Berakhot ⁶⁸ He forbade the Cohen to eat heave; this is a biblical rule agreed to by everybody. It is implied that he required the offending party to pay for the Cohen’s food since heave, permitted only to Cohanim, is sold at a discount.Impurity of persons and food is invisible damage ⁶⁹ The guilty party only had to pay the difference between profane and sanctified food, i. e., the additional cost incurred by the victim.

It was stated⁷⁰ 92a.: Rebbi Eliezer ben Rebbi Yose the Galilean says, the person who arranges a compromise is sinning⁷¹, and the one who praises a compromiser is like a blasphemer before the Omnipresent, as it is said⁷² 10:3.: he who blesses a compromiser slanders the Eternal! The law should pierce the mountain, as Moses did⁷³. 18:16) and did not invite them to an arbitration panel.. But Aaron promoted peace⁷⁴ I 12, II 24) explains that he dissuaded people from going to court. This is preferable according to everybody., as it is said⁷⁵ 2:6., in peace and straightness he went with Me.

footnotes: ⁷⁰ Tosephta 1:2, Babli 6b, Yebamot ⁷¹ It is clear from the following paragraphs and the parallels, that the statement is interpreted to apply to cases where either the trial already has started or where existing law allows a clear decision. ⁷² Ps. ⁷³ Who ordered ail people with suits to appear before him for judgment (Ex ⁷⁴ The midrash (Avot dR. Nathan ⁷⁵ Mal.

It was stated⁷⁰ 92a.: ⁷⁶ 94a. In other Yerushalmi sources (Hallah 1:9 Notes 218–221; Šabbat 13:3 14a l. 50) it is an Amoraic statement.“Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob says, why does the verse say⁷² 10:3., he who blesses unlawful gain slanders the Eternal? They gave a parable, to what can this be compared? To one who stole a se’ah of wheat, brought it to the baker, separated its ḥallah⁷⁷, and fed it to his children. He pronounces blessings but it is blasphemy.

footnotes: ⁷⁰ Tosephta 1:2, Babli 6b, Yebamot ⁷⁶ Babli Bava qamma ⁷² Ps. ⁷⁷ To avoid committing a deadly sin. If he recites the required blessing, he commits an intentional sin; if he induces the baker to recite the blessings, the baker commits an unintended sin and the thief violates the commandment not to put a stone in the way of a blind man.

⁷⁸ Rebbi Meir says, why does the verse say⁷² 10:3., he who blesses unlawful gain slanders the Eternal? These are Joseph’s brothers, as it is is said⁷⁹ 37:26.: What is the gain if we slay our brother, etc.”

footnotes: ⁷⁸ In the Tosephta (1:3) an anonymous statement. ⁷² Ps. ⁷⁹ Gen.

⁸⁰“Rebbi Joshua ben Qorḥa says, it is a good deed to mediate a compromise, as it is said⁸¹ 8:16, cf. Taˋaniot 4:2 (68a l. 75), Megillah 3:7 (74b l. 48).: Truth and judgment of peace. If there is truth, there is no judgment of peace. If there is peace, there is no judgment of truth. What is truth containing a judgment of peace? I am saying, this is compromise.”

footnotes: ⁸⁰ Tosephta 1:3. ⁸¹ Zach.

⁸²“If somebody judged correctly, absolved the innocent and condemned the guilty, the verse counts it as if he practiced kindness both towards the innocent and towards the guilty. Kindness towards the innocent, because he returned his money to him. And towards the guilty, for he removed the proceeds of robbery from his hands.⁸³” Rebbi Abbahu said, judgment and judgment is written in the verse⁸¹ 8:16, cf. Taˋaniot 4:2 (68a l. 75), Megillah 3:7 (74b l. 48).: “Truth and judgment of peace judge in your gates.”

footnotes: ⁸² Tosephta 1:4, a statement of Rebbi; the same in the Babli 6b. ⁸³ And therefore protects him from the judgment of Heaven. ⁸¹ Zach.

Rebbi Zachariah asked before Rebbi Immi: Does one act following that Tanna, as it was stated: ⁸⁶“Rebbi Simeon ben Menassiah says, sometimes you are empowered to propose a compromise, sometimes you are not empowered to propose a compromise. How is this? Two come before a judge; before he heard their arguments, or after he heard their arguments but does not know how to correctly apply the law, he may tell them, go and work out a compromise. After you heard their arguments and know how to correctly apply the law, you may not propose a compromise, as it is said⁸⁷ 17:14.: One may remove the beginning of a quarrel like water; before it becomes manifest, the quarrel may be abandoned. Before the quarrel became manifest, you are permitted to abandon it; after the quarrel became manifest, you are not permitted to abandon it.” Rebbi Mattaniah said, even compromise needs intelligent decision⁸⁸.

footnotes: ⁸⁶ Tosephta 1:6, Babli 6b. ⁸⁷ Prov. ⁸⁸ He objects to the statement that the judge should send the parties away to work out a compromise on their own; he requires the judge to guide them towards a reasonable compromise.

⁸⁹ 6, Sheiltot Mišpatim 58, and in all Medieval quotes; only in Babli 6b both in the Munich ms. and editio princeps incorrectly: R. Simeon ben Laqish.“Rebbi Jehudah ben Laqish said: If two people appeared before a judge, one decent and one agressive. Before he started to hear their arguments, he may tell them, I will not hear your case, lest the agressive one lose his case and become his enemy. After he started hearing their arguments, he may not tell them, I will not hear your case, for it is said,⁹⁰ 1:17. do not be afraid of anybody.

footnotes: ⁸⁹ Tosephta 1:7, Tanhuma Mišpatim ⁹⁰ Deut.

⁹¹“Rebbi Joshua ben Qorha says, if somebody⁹² in the Babli (Ševuot 31a): A student sitting before his teacher. This probably has to be understood here. was sitting next to a judge and saw a benefit for the poor and a detriment for the rich, from where that he should not keep silent? For it is said⁹⁰ 1:17., do not be afraid of anybody.

footnotes: ⁹¹ Tosephta 1:8. ⁹² In a similar, anonymous, baraita ⁹⁰ Deut.

⁹⁷ The judges have to know with Whom they judge, and the witnesses have to know before Whom they are testifying: before Him Who commanded and the world came into existence, as it is said³⁰ 19:17. The verse continues: “before the priests and the judges.”, the two people who are quarrelling shall stand before the Eternal, and it is said⁹³ 82:1., the Almighty stands**in the assembly of the judges. So Josaphat told the judges, look what you are doing, for you do not judge for man, but for the Eternal⁹⁴ 19:6.. How is it possible for flesh and blood to judge his Creator? But the Holy One, praise to Him, said: I said that Reuben should have 100 denars and Simeon nothing. You take from one and give it to the other⁹⁵. I have to repay it to him, and will Myself be paid by this man⁹⁶.

footnotes: ⁹⁷ Tosephta 1:9. ³⁰ Deut. ⁹³ Ps. ⁹⁴ 2Chr. ⁹⁵ Incorrectly. ⁹⁶ The judge.

It was stated⁹⁷: “Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, judgment is passed by three [judges], a compromise is made by two⁹⁸. The compromise is stronger than the judgment in that two [judges] who judged can repeal their judgment⁹⁹ but two who negotiated a compromise cannot repeal¹⁰⁰1:4–6..

footnotes: ⁹⁷ Tosephta 1:9. ⁹⁸ This also is the text of the Babli, 5b. But in the Tosephta: Just as judgment is rendered by three [judges], so compromise is made before three [judges]. ⁹⁹ Since is was rendered in regular fashion. ¹⁰⁰ From the moment a party acquired what was awarded to him by the compromise, since this is a monetary transaction following the rules of Qiddušin

“The rapist and the seducer,” etc. ¹⁰² 4:4, explained there in Notes 113–116. The Ketubot (כ) text is original since only there is the disagreement between Rebbis Ze‘ira and Abbahu being explained. Rebbi Mana said, they disagree about the preliminarily married adolescent female. Rebbi Meïr says, she loses her ketubah in a court of three and is stoned in a court of 23; but the Sages say, at the same place which sentences her to be stoned she loses her ketubah. But in the case of the calumniator, everybody agrees that by the court in which the witnesses are stoned, the husband is flogged and pays 100 tetradrachmas. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said to him, would they differ where it was not stated? But they differ about the calumniator! Rebbi Meïr says, he is flogged and pays 100 tetradrachmas by the judgment of three and the witnesses are stoned by the judgment of 23; but the rabbis say, by the court in which the witnesses are stoned, the husband is flogged and pays 100 tetradrachmas. But in the case of the preliminarily married adolescent female, everybody agrees that at the same place which sentences her to be stoned she loses her ketubah. It turns out that Rebbi Mana follows Rebbi Ze‘ira and Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun follows Rebbi Abbahu.

footnotes: ¹⁰² This paragraph is from Ketubot

¹⁰³ Rebbi Abbahu asked: Following Rebbi Meïr, should an ox which is stoned¹⁰⁴21:28). have to pay damages¹⁰⁵ by a court of three and be stoned by 23? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun told him, the rules of an ox which is stoned are all about money¹⁰⁶ 7:1 Notes 19–70; Giţţin 5:5 Note 136), it is clear that stoning the ox is a fine imposed on its owner.; it is a decision of the verse that it should be stoned.

footnotes: ¹⁰³ The paragraph is repeated in Halakhah 4. ¹⁰⁴ The animal which killed a human (Ex. ¹⁰⁵ Not the ox but its owner. ¹⁰⁶ Since fines and corporal punishment are mutually exclusive (Terumot

MISHNAH: Whipping by three [judges]; in the name of Rebbi Ismael they said, by 23¹⁰⁷. The lengthening of a month by three [judges]¹⁰⁸ 3:11 21c l. 24)., the intercalation of a year by three [judges]¹⁰⁹, the words of Rebbi Meïr. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, one starts with three, one discusses with five, and one votes with seven¹¹⁰ 13:4. There is no basic disagreement between R. Meïr and Rabban Simeon, since the latter agrees that in an emergency situation, a duly empowered committee of three is competent. Since Rabban Simeon was the Patriarch of the restauration during the second half of the Second Century, his procedure was the one actually used.. But if they voted with three, it is intercalated. The leaning of Elders²²⁰ 4:15. If the High Court realized that they had erred in a ruling and permitted something which is biblically prohibited, they have to bring a purification sacrifice and a deputation of the Court has to lean with their hands on the head of the sacrificial animal while confessing their error, as detailed in Traxtate Horaiot. and the breaking of the calf’s neck²²¹. 21:1–9, Soţah Chapter 9. by three [judges], the words of Rebbi Simeon, but Rebbi Jehudah says, by five. Ḥalîṣah²²² 25:5–9. and repudiations²²³ Chapter 13. by three [judges], [redemption of] the growth of the fourth year²²⁴19:24; Maˋaser Šeni Chapter 5). They may be redeemed under the rules of Second Tithe, the sanctity being transferred to the redemption money. and Second Tithe²²⁵ˋaser Šeni 4:2, Note 51. Second Tithe remains the farmer’s property but must be eaten in purity at the site of the Temple. If there is any danger of spoilage in transport, the produce may be redeemed and the sanctity transferred to the redemption money, Deut. 14:22–26; cf. Introduction to Tractate Maˋaser Šeni. whose value is not known by three [appraisers], also of Temple dedications²²⁶27:11. by three. Estimations of movables²²⁷27:2–7 depending on age and sex. If the person wants to pay with movables in lieu of money, their value has to be determined by a committee of three. These rules are detailed in Tractate ˋArakhin. by three [appraisers], Rebbi Jehudah says that one of them must be a Cohen; of real estate²²⁸ 27:14–25. In all verses speaking of redemption of property donated to the Temple, ‘the Cohen” is mentioned in the singular. nine and a Cohen. The same holds for humans²²⁹. Capital crimes [are judged] by 23. The participants in active or passive bestiality²⁵⁹ [is judged] by 23, as it is said, you shall slay the woman and the animal²⁶⁰ 20:16. Since woman and animal are mentioned together, the animal can be condemned only by a court empowered to judge the woman who had sex with the animal., and it says, and you shall slay the animal²⁶¹ 20:15, about male bestiality.. The bull to be stoned²⁶² [is judged] by 23, as it is said, the bull shall be stoned, also its owner shall die²⁶³. 21:29.; like the owner’s death sentence so is the ox’s death sentence. The wolf and the lion, the bear, and the tiger, and the panther, and the snake are sentenced to death by 23²⁶⁴. Rebbi Eliezer says, anyone quick to kill them is meritorious²⁶⁵; Rebbi Aqiba says, they are sentenced by 23.

footnotes: ¹⁰⁷ The imposition of corporal punishment needs an official court of duly ordained judges. The Mishnah is a reconstruction of what was assumed to be the historic procedure; R. Ismael lived about 70 years after the removal of criminal jurisdiction from Jewish courts and R. Meïr, represented by the anonymous opinion, more than 100 years afterwards. But the prescription of the Mishnah certainly was followed by the autonomous Jewish courts under the Parthians. ¹⁰⁸ Whether a thirtieth day should be counted for the current month. Fixing the calendar was the sole privilege of a committee of the Patriarch’s court as a successor to the Synhedrion. The current computed calendar was promulgated by such a court in the middle of the Fourth Century (Eruvin ¹⁰⁹ In the current calendar, the addition of 30 days to the lunar year, labelled as “First Adar.” ¹¹⁰ A committe of three has to decide whether the year be a candidate for intercalation; an enlarged committe of five has to do the detailed computations; a further enlarged committee of seven has to confirm the computations. Intercalated months in the lunar year are necessary to keep Passover in the “month of spring” as required by Ex. ²²⁰ Lev. ²²¹ The ritual of atonement for an unsolved murder, Deut ²²² The ceremony by which the widow of a childless man is freed from levirate marriage, which requires involvement of “the Elders”, Deut. ²²³ The repudiation of a marriage by an underage girl, married off by her mother or brothers after her father’s death and whose marriage during her minority is valid only rabbinically; cf. Yebamot ²²⁴ The fruits of a tree in the fourth year after planting, the first year they are permitted as food, have to be eaten in holiness by the rules of Second Tithe (Lev. ²²⁵ Cf. Ma ²²⁶ Property donated to the Temple which will be sold by the Temple treasurer upon appraisal by a committee of three; Lev. ²²⁷ If a person makes a vow to donate the estimated value of a person to the Temple, the amount payable is specified in Lev. ²²⁸ Lev. ²²⁹ Somebody promising to pay to the Temple the value a person would fetch if sold as a slave. ²⁵⁹ Whether human or animal; the additional statement is needed only for the animal. ²⁶⁰ Lev. ²⁶¹ Lev. ²⁶² Which had killed a human. ²⁶³ Ex ²⁶⁴ He does not need permission; it is no case for a court. ²⁶⁵ End of Halakhah 1, Notes 103–106.

HALAKHAH: “Whipping by three [judges],” etc. Rebbi Abbahu asked: Should not a sentence of whipping be passed by 23 [judges], since sometimes he might die from the whippings, so that it is a case of potential death sentence¹¹¹.

footnotes: ¹¹¹ He holds that R. Ismael’s position is the only reasonable one. But since the problem is purely theoretical (Note 32), it is not pursued further.

Bar Qappara understood everything from here: May the Eternal bless you and preserve you, from here that one starts with three. May the Eternal illuminate His Presence for you and be gracious to you, from here that one continues with five. May the Eternal turn His Presence to you and give you peace, from here that one finishes with seven¹¹² 6:24–26, which have 3, 5, and 7 words respectively, one may infer that proceeding by 3,5,7 will give a blessed result. In the Babli, 10b, this argument is attributed to early Amoraïm; in Megillah23a it is applied to the number of people called to read from the Torah..

footnotes: ¹¹² From the verses of the priestly blessings, Num.

Rebbi Joshua ben Levi understood everything from the following: The chief executioner took … the three guards of the threshhold¹¹³ 52:24., from here that one starts with three. And five men from the king’s entourage¹¹⁴ 25:19., from here that one continues with five. And seven men from the King’s entourage¹¹⁵ 52:25., from here that one finishes with seven¹¹⁶ the verses describe the members of king Sedekia’s court and therefore are appropriate to the determination of the calendar which is a governmental exercise..

footnotes: ¹¹³ Jer. ¹¹⁴ 2K. ¹¹⁵ Jer. ¹¹⁶ Cf. Babli 10b. According to Rashi ad loc.,

Rebbi Jonathan said, from there the great Synhedrion of all of Israel. The minister of the executioners took Seraiah the Chief Priest and Zephania the priest¹¹³ 52:24., these are two. And seven men from the king’s entourage¹¹⁵ 52:25., this makes nine. And sixty men from the People of the Land¹¹⁷ 25:19, Jer. 52:25., this makes seventy minus one. And from the city one eunuch¹¹⁵ 52:25., this makes seventy. There are Tannaïm who state seventy-one: The chief executioner took … the three guards of the threshhold, and seven men from the king’s entourage, and sixty men from the People of the Land, and from the city he took one eunuch, this makes seventy-one. And why is he called a eunuch? Because he transposes practice¹¹⁸ 21b, s. v. כנגד..

footnotes: ¹¹³ Jer. ¹¹⁵ Jer. ¹¹⁷ 2K. ¹¹⁵ Jer. ¹¹⁸ In rabbinic Hebrew, סרס “to castrate” is also used in the sense of “to transpose words or letters”. While in the verse he is described as minister of defense, he is taken here as president of the court who can transpose precedents to apply to other cases. Cf. Tosafot Megillah

One verse says five, the other verse says seven. The latter includes the two clerks of court.

There is no lengthening of the month, but sanctification of the month¹¹⁹. Samuel says, sanctification of the month needs no less than ten [participants]120. Should Fellows ¹²¹) but have not yet reached the status of rabbi. be able to enter for the sanctification of the month? Rebbi Hoshaia said, I was a Fellow and Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac took me to the sanctification of the month, but I do not know whether I was counted or not. It is obvious that he was not counted¹²², but why? Was it because he was his son-in-law¹²³, or because Fellows are nor able to enter for the sanctification of the month? Rebbi Cahana said, I was a Fellow when Rebbi Tanḥum bar Ḥiyya took me to the sanctification of the month and I was counted. This implies that Fellows enter for the sanctification of the month.

footnotes: ¹¹⁹ Babli 10b. In the absence of a computed calendar, the lengthening of the month is automatic. If the Synhedrion does not declare the 30th of a month as the 1st of the next, the 31st automatically is the first of the next month since no lunar month has more than 30 days. Therefore, action by the Synhedrion is needed not to lengthen, but to shorten the month and to designate the 30th as a semi-holiday. ¹²¹ Members of the Academy who are pledged to follow the rules of fellowship (cf. Introduction to Tractate Demay ¹²² If the chair of the meeting had asked him for his opinion, he would have remembered. ¹²³ Since relatives are barred from sitting together as judges and R. Hoshaia was R. Samuel’s son-in-law, he could not participate even if qualified.

Are Fellows able to enter for the intercalation of the year? Let us hear from the following: ¹²⁴ It happened that Rabban Gamliel said, call seven Elders to a meeting on the upper floor, but eight entered. He asked, who is the one who entered without permission? Samuel minor¹²⁵ stood up and said, I came up here without permission since I have a practical problem and I have to ask advice on it. Rabban Gamliel told him, you compare to Eldad and Medad; if I had said “two”, you would have been one of them. Nevertheless, they did not intercalate on that day but talked about themes in the Torah and intercalated the next day¹²⁶ vol. 2, Tel Aviv 1983)..

footnotes: ¹²⁴ Babli 11a. ¹²⁵ He is called “minor” because of all people called Samuel only the prophet of the same name reached a higher state of holiness. ¹²⁶ To protect the secrecy of the algorithm with which the years of intercalation were computed. This supports the contention of the Yerushalmi Gaon Eviatar haCohen in his Epistle that during the entire time of the Second Temple the calendar was computed and testimony about the new moon was only used as confirmation of the computation (M. Gil, Palestine during the first Moslem period,

¹²⁷ 3:1, Sotah 9:1 (Notes 18–19). The two are copies of one another; the text here is a reformulation. lt was stated: If the Synhedrion¹²⁸ saw the killer. Some Tannaïm state: two of them become witnesses and testify before the rest of them¹²⁹. There are Tannaïm who state that they all are witnesses and have to go and testify before other [judges]¹³⁰. Rebbi Jehudah ben Pazi in the name of Rebbi Zeˋira: As they differ here, so they differ about testimony for the New Moon¹³¹.

footnotes: ¹²⁷ This paragraph has parallels in Roš Haššanah ¹²⁸ In the other sources, “a court”. The text here is influenced by the sequel which deals with a court empowered to treat calendar matters, the Synhedrion. ¹²⁹ After addition of another two judges to complete the required number of judges. ¹³⁰ They hold that a witness is automatically disqualified as a judge since he has an opinion about the case before the start of the proceedings. ¹³¹ Whether members of the Synhedrion who saw the New Moon may act as witnesses before their colleagues.

¹³² 3:1 (58d l.2), noted ר. Why cannot always one stand up and one sit down¹³³3:1 which prescribes that if three members of the Court saw the New Moon, one of them may sit with two others as a court and the other two who saw the New Moon appear as witnesses before them. The question arises, why does one have to call two others; would one not be sufficient if alternatingly one stands up as a witness and one sits down as a judge.? There is a difference because a witness cannot be a judge¹³⁴. Rav Huna knew testimony for somebody. He¹³⁵ came and wanted to have the suit judged before Rav Huna, and denied all. Rebbi Samuel ben Rav Isaac told him, because you know that (Rebbi) [Rav]¹³⁶ Huna is an important person¹³⁷ you deny everything. What if Rav Huna went and testified against you in another court? Rav Huna asked him, does one do that? He answered, yes. Rav Huna recused himself from that suit, went, and testified before another court¹³⁸ 25b, Bava qamma 90b..

footnotes: ¹³² This paragraph is a parallel to the text in Roš Haššanah ¹³³ This refers to Mishnah Roš Haššanah ¹³⁴ Even if one does not hold that a potential witness be automatically disqualified as a judge, he must hold that once a person acted as a witness he is disqualified as a judge. ¹³⁵ Rav Huna knew testimony for a creditor. The debtor required that the suit be heard in Rav Huna’s court. He knew that Rav Huna, as judge, could not act as witness and was prevented from using his knowledge in his judgment. He thought it was safe to deny any debt. ¹³⁶ The correct title is in ר. ¹³⁷ As Rav’s successor, he was Chief Judge of all courts under the jurisdiction of the Academy of Sura. The debtor assumed that a Chief Judge could not appear in a lower court. ¹³⁸ This decides practice. A judge who knows of the case has to disqualify himself and appear as a witness in another court. The Babli agrees, Roš Haššanah

¹³⁸ 25b, Bava qamma 90b. Rebbi Simeon ben Ioḥai stated: You shall sanctify the Fiftieth Year¹⁴⁰ 25:10.. You shall sanctify years but not months¹⁴¹ 28:11–15), not of the entire month. But the Jubilee year itself is holy. In the Babli 10b, this is in the name of R. Eliezer or R. Eleazar; in Roš Haššanah8b in the name of “the rabbis.”. But did we not state¹⁴² 2:8.: “The president of the court says: sanctified”? What means sanctified? Confirmed¹⁴³. It was stated: For sanctifying months one starts¹⁴⁴ with the most senior person. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ada said, the Mishnah says this: “The president of the court says: sanctified.” It was stated, for intercalation of the (month) [year]¹⁴⁵ is the correct one. The Sanhedrin text, in parentheses, is a scribal error. one starts from the side¹⁴⁶. Rebbi Zebida said, but this lower house¹⁴⁷ do not proceed in this way, for they did not hear what Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Marius¹⁴⁸ and Rebbi Jonah, Rebbi Abba bar Ḥiyya said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: For lengthening the month one starts with the most senior person, for intercalating the year one starts from the side. When Rebbi Joḥanan was participating as the most junior person, they told him, say: “this year is sanctified in its intercalation.” He said, “this year is sanctified in intercalation.” Rebbi Jonathan said, look at the language which the smith’s son¹⁴⁹ taught us. If he had said, “in its intercalation,” I would have said that this refers to the eleven days by which the solar year exceeds the lunar one, but [he said] “in intercalation”, that the Sages added thirty days to it¹⁵⁰. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa, Rebbi Yasa in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: For intercalation one follows the date of ordination. In the Academy one follows usage; each one gives his opinion at his place and sums up. For example, Rebbi Ḥanina¹⁵¹ started, Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqisch summed up. Rebbi Abba bar Zavda started, Rebbi Yasa and Rebbi Immi¹⁵² since R. Hiyya (bar Abba), while also a student of R. Yasa, is not known to have participated in an Academy with him. summed up. Rebbi Ḥaggai started, Rebbi Jonah and Rebbi Yose summed up. Rebbi Cahana was ordained before Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa, but Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa participated in intercalation before Rebbi Cahana was invited. He said, the person who formulated the tradition does not respect it for himself¹⁵³.

footnotes: ¹³⁸ This decides practice. A judge who knows of the case has to disqualify himself and appear as a witness in another court. The Babli agrees, Roš Haššanah ¹⁴⁰ Lev. ¹⁴¹ The “sanctification of the month” (Note 119) really is a sanctification of the Day of the New Moon (Num. ¹⁴² Mishnah Roš Haššanah ¹⁴³ The day is confirmed as one of additional religious services. ¹⁴⁴ Polling the judges’ opinions. ¹⁴⁵ The text in brackets, from Roš Haššanah, ¹⁴⁶ The senior judge sat in the middle, the most junior judge sat on the last chair to his left or right. One starts polling the most junior judge. ¹⁴⁷ The Patriarch’s court, the only one empowered to determine the calendar, was held in low esteem by him. ¹⁴⁸ It is impossible to determine whether מרייא or מרייא is the correct reading. ¹⁴⁹ R. Johanan bar Nappaha, “son of the bellows-blower.” ¹⁵⁰ Any intercalary year has an additional month of 30 days; in the computed calendar this is Adar I. ¹⁵¹ He probably is R. Hinena, the student of R. Johanan in Tiberias, not R. Hanina, his teacher at Sepphoris ¹⁵² This is the correct text, not “R. Hiyya, R. Yasa, and R. Immi” as in Roš Haššanah ¹⁵³ By his own teaching in the name of R. Johanan, he should have insisted that R. Cahana be invited first.

¹⁵⁴27a, it is told that R. Jeremiah bar Abba was praying behind Rav, and that Rav remained immovable until R. Jeremiah had finished praying, from which it is inferred that one may not walk by a person standing in silent prayer. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba was standing praying. Rav¹⁵⁵ Cahana, as correctly identified in Roš Haššanah, not one of the Rav Cahanas mentioned in the Babli, one of which was a student (and possibly stepson) of Rav, one generation before R. Ḥiyya bar Abba, and the other a contemporary of Rav Ashi, five generations later. Nevertheless, this Rebbi Cahana is characterized as a Babylonian, first by his use of the prefix ק for the present participle and also because only Babylonian families of priests trace their family back to the priest Eli of Shiloh, whose male descendants are cursed to die young. Cahana came and stood behind him in prayer. When Rebbi Ḥiyya had finished, he sat down in order not to walk by him. Rav Cahana spent a long time praying. After he finished, he told him, is that your way to make your teacher suffer? He told him, I am a descendant of the House of Eli, of whom it is written¹⁵⁶ 3:14.: if the sin of the House of Eli would be atoned for by sacrifice and offering. By sacrifice and offering it cannot be atoned for, but it can be atoned for by prayer¹⁵⁷ 18a, the verse is applied to the family of Rabba bar Nahmani, who could prolong life by Torah study and charity work.. He prayed for him, he reached old age while his fingernails remained red like those of a small child¹⁵⁸.

footnotes: ¹⁵⁴ This paragraph is inserted only because R. Cahana, a very minor figure, was mentioned before and there was a story known about him. In the Babli, Berakhot ¹⁵⁵ The person here must be Rebbi ¹⁵⁶ 1S. ¹⁵⁷ In the Babli, Roš Haššanah ¹⁵⁸ Translation of the text of ר, דקקה, rather than the text here, רקקה “exceedingly thin”.

They preferred an old man to Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish for intercalation but had to remove him by the other door¹⁵⁹. He said, this is their reward¹⁶⁰. Did he not hear what Rebbi Crispus¹⁶¹ said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: It happened that the year was intercalated by three cow hands. One said, in Adar, early and late grain¹⁶² sprout together. One said, in Adar the ox will die naked¹⁶³ בעדרייה “in its herd”. In Adar (about March) sometimes it is cold and cattle might die; sometimes it is hot, cattle look for shade under trees and rub themselves against them as if they tried to remove their hides. and try to strip off his hide under the fig tree. One said, if in Adar the East wind¹⁶⁴ blows, open your jaws and go towards it. And we see that this year nothing of these applies. They intercalated the year on their word. Rebbi Ḥelbo said, because the Court agreed with them¹⁶⁵. Rebbi Zeˋira said, but they all have to agree to the same reason¹⁶⁶. But since they all agree with one another it was that they all agreed as to the reason¹⁶⁷.

footnotes: ¹⁵⁹ He turned out not to have the required qualifications. ¹⁶⁰ The embarassment of having to remove a member of the Court is deserved punishment for the powers-that-be who neglected R. Simeon ben Laqish. ¹⁶¹ The form קריספדא is Babylonian. The story is anonymous in Babli 18b. ¹⁶² Barley and wheat. ¹⁶³ In Roš Haššanah ¹⁶⁴ The start of the Hamsin season. ¹⁶⁵ The cow hands might have provided the arguments but the action was the Court’s; the story is irrelevant for R. Simeon ben Laqish’s complaint. ¹⁶⁶ How could they follow the cow hands if each of them gave a different reason? ¹⁶⁷ All three of them agreed to all three reasons.

Why was Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish offended by this? He was worried about what Rebbi Eleazar said, since Rebbi Eleazar said¹⁶⁸ 13:9. In the Bali, Ketubot 112a.: My hand will be against the prophets who see … vain things, in my people’s council¹⁶⁹they shall not be; that is [the secret of]¹⁷⁰ intercalation; in the documents of the House of Israel they will not be inscribed; that is ordination; and to the earth of Israel they shall not come; that is the Land of Israel. When Rebbi Eleazar came here, he said, I have one. When they ordained him, he said, I have two.When he was asked to participate in the intercalation, he said, I have all three [with me]¹⁷⁰.

footnotes: ¹⁶⁸ Ez. ¹⁶⁹ Identifying biblical סוד “council” with rabbinic סוד “secret”. ¹⁷⁰ From the text in Roš Haššanah. ¹⁷⁰ From the text in Roš Haššanah.

Rebbi Abba bar Zavda in the name of Rav: The reason of Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Sadoq: When the Heavenly Court sees that the earthly Court sanctifies it, they also sanctify it¹⁷¹; it has no relevance here. The reference is to Mishnah Roš Haššanah 2:8 where Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Sadoq says that the New Moon after a month of 30 days does not need sanctification by the Court since it was sanctified by Heaven. In Roš Haššanah one reads: When the Heavenly court sees that the Earthly Court did not sanctity (the 30th day), they (automatically) sanctify (the 31st day.).

footnotes: ¹⁷¹ This is a slightly garbled reformulation of the corresponding paragraph in Roš Haššanah

Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina. It happened that 24 people appointed by the House of Rebbi entered to intercalate the year at Lydda when an evil eye entered with them and they all died at the same time. From that time on they removed it from Judea and established it in Galilee. They also wanted to remove the signal¹⁷². Rebbi Simon told them, do we not even want to leave a remembrance in Judea? But we find that they intercalated the year at Baˋalat. This Baˋalat is sometimes [mentioned as being] in Judea, sometimes in Dan. Elteqe, and Gibbeton, and Baˋalat are from Judea¹⁷³ 19:44, in the list of cities of Dan.. Baˋalah, and Iyyim, and Asem¹⁷⁴ 15:29, in the list of cities of Jehudah. Probably the reference should have been to v. 24, mentioning the town of בְּעָלוֹת. are from Dan, and we find that they intercalated the year at Baˋalat. Let us say that the houses were in Judea and the fields in Dan. Rebbi Jeremiah asked before Rebbi Zeˋira: Is Lydda not in Judea¹⁷⁵ 8:13).? He answered, yes. Then why does one not intercalate there? He told him, because they are coarse of spirit and have little learning¹⁷⁶. He turned his face and saw Rebbi Aḥa and Rebbi Judah ben Pazi¹⁷⁷. He said to him, presently¹⁷⁸ you made me insult rabbis.

footnotes: ¹⁷² They wanted to drop the condition of agriculture in Judea from consideration in deciding on intercalation, as described in the next paragraph. ¹⁷³ Jos. ¹⁷⁴ Jos. ¹⁷⁵ In post-biblical Judea; it was in biblical Benjamin (1Chr. ¹⁷⁶ While before the war of Bar Kokhba it was one of the main seats of learning. ¹⁷⁷ Rabbis of Lydda. ¹⁷⁸ Greek εἷτα. Since the word is also found in Syriac, it is not impossible that two native Babylonians used it when speaking to one another.

¹⁷⁹“For three indications one intercalates a year: because of fresh grain¹⁸⁰ ceremony (Lev. 23:9–14), the lunar year has to be adjusted so that Passover be celebrated in the “month of fresh grain” (Ex. 13:4–5)., the equinox¹⁸¹13:4–5 are interpreted to mean that the spring equinox must fall before Passover, but no more than 30 days earlier., and tree fruits¹⁸². One intercalates because of two of them, because of a single one does not intercalate; but if they intercalated, it is intercalated. If fresh grain was one of the reasons, everybody was happy¹⁸³ ceremony, Lev. 23:14. If the year was intercalated because new grain was not ready, it imposed no restrictions on people since new grain was not available anyhow.. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel said, also¹⁸⁴ because of the equinox.”

footnotes: ¹⁷⁹ The following paragraphs are all in the Tosephta, Chapter 2, 2–11. The present paragraph and the following also are in the Babli, 11b. ¹⁸⁰ Since the celebration of the festival of unleavened bread requires the offering of fresh barley grain in the ˋomer ¹⁸¹ As explained later, the verses Ex. ¹⁸² If it seems likely that the fruits will not be edible by Pentecost, the start of the season for First Fruits. ¹⁸³ It is forbidden to eat from new grain before the ˋomer ¹⁸⁴ Rashi in his Commentary wants to delete אַף “also”, since it dos not make much sense in the context. But since the text is confirmed by three sources, it cannot be deleted.

“For three regions one intercalates a year, because of Judea, Transjordan, and Galilee¹⁸⁶ can be offered from any place in the Holy Land if barley is not ripe in Judea. Transjordan is defined as that part East of the Jordan which is included in the legal definition of the Land of Israel, cf. Ševiˋit 6:1, Notes 32–51.. One intercalates because of two of them, while because of one of them one does not intercalate; if they did intercalate it is not intercalated¹¹⁸⁸. If Judea was one of the reasons, everybody¹⁸⁹ was happy since the ˋOmer was brought from there.

footnotes: ¹⁸⁶ Since the ˋomer ¹ In the Tosephta: “it is intercalated.” The sentence is missing in the Babli, which has to be read as tacit endorsement of the Tosephta (or better, the Tosephta has to be read as explaining the Babli’s position.) ¹⁸⁸ Since intercalation was the prerogative of the Synhedrion, the expression “it is not intercalated” can only mean that in this case the intercalation is revocable, in contrast to other cases where it is irrevocable once announced. ¹⁸⁹ In Judea, where one could expect cheap new grain after Passover.

¹⁹⁰“One intercalates neither because of the cold, nor because of the rains¹⁹¹; if they did intercalate it is not intercalated¹⁸⁸. One intercalates neither because of kid goats nor because of pigeon chicks, nor because of milk [lambs]¹⁹²; but all of them are ancillary reasons for the year. ¹⁹³ Rebbi Yannai¹⁹⁴ said that Rabban Gamliel¹⁹⁵ used to say: The sheep are thin and the pigeon chicks small; it appears good in my eyes and in those of my colleagues to add thirty days to the year.”

footnotes: ¹⁹⁰ Babli 11a. ¹⁹¹ The convenience of travelers, pilgrims for the Passover festival, should not be a consideration. ¹⁸⁸ Since intercalation was the prerogative of the Synhedrion, the expression “it is not intercalated” can only mean that in this case the intercalation is revocable, in contrast to other cases where it is irrevocable once announced. ¹⁹² Most private obligations of sacrifices are satisfied either with a couple of pigeons or with offerings of lambs and kid goats. It is desirable that there be an ample supply available for pilgrims at Passover time, but this is not an absolute necessity. ¹⁹³ The text of the Babli makes clear that this sentence explains what is meant by “ancillary reasons for intercalation.” ¹⁹⁴ The Tanna. ¹⁹⁵ In both Babylonian sources, Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel. The Yerushalmi version is preferable, as shown by the later text of Rabban Gamliel I’s proclamations.

¹⁹⁶“Rebbi Jehudah said: it happened that Rabban Gamliel and the Elders were sitting on stairs on the Temple Mount¹⁹⁷; their scribe Joḥanan was sitting before them when Rabban Gamliel said to him, write: To our brothers in the Upper Southland and the Lower Southland¹⁹⁸, may you have much peace. We inform you that the time of liquidation has come, to deliver tithes from the sheaves of grain. To our brothers in the Upper Galilee and the Lower Galilee¹⁹⁹ˋit 9:2, Notes 40–41., may you have much peace. We inform you that the time of liquidation has come, to deliver tithes from the olive presses. To our brothers in the diaspora of Babylonia, the diaspora of Media, the diaspora of Greece, and all other diasporas of Israel, may you have much peace. We inform you that the sheep are thin, the pigeon chicks small, and springtime has not arrived; it appears good in my eyes and those of my colleagues to add thirty days to this year.”

footnotes: ¹⁹⁶ Babli 11b, Tosephta 2:6. ¹⁹⁷ Since they assembled outside the Temple precinct, the procedure is to be dated to the time of the Roman procurators who had taken over criminal jurisdiction “40 years before the destruction of the Temple” (Note 31). ¹⁹⁸ The grain growing areas South of Lydda, both in the hills (the Upper) and near the coast (the Lower). Heave and tithes, which have to be separated immediately after processing, have to be delivered before the holiday, and Second Tithe, in years 1,2,4,5 of the Sabbatical cycle, taken to Jerusalem for the holiday celebration. ¹⁹⁹ For definition of these regions see Ševi

²⁰⁰“One does not intercalate a year unless it be missing most of a month. How much is most of a month? 16 days²⁰¹. Rebbi Jehudah says two thirds of a month, 21 days.” Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman said, only that the ˋOmer should be brought at the end of Nisan of equinoxes²⁰². Rebbi Yose said, before Passover²⁰³. Rav Mattaniah said, only that lulav be taken at the end of Tishre of equinoxes²⁰⁴.

footnotes: ²⁰⁰ Babli 13a, Tosephta 2:7. ²⁰¹ The version of the Tosephta implies that a month has to be added if otherwise the Spring equinox would fall on the 17th of Nisan or later, for R. Jehudah on the 22nd or later. ²⁰² “Nisan of the equinox” is the solar period 30 days from the equinox. He is more restrictive and holds that the equinox must fall on or before (but no more than 30 days before) the 15g of the lunar Nisan. “At the end” means “after the first.” (Today’s computed calendar sometimes violates this rule.) ²⁰³ Since the Passover day is the 14th of Nisan, he requires the Spring equinox not to fall after this date. He is reputed to be the editor of the computed calendar, which however has come to us only through the works of authors living several hundred years later. ²⁰⁴ He requires in addition that the fall equinox be no later than the 15th of Tishre. In our computed calendar, this rule is violated about once in a 19 year period.

²⁰⁵“One intercalates a year neither less than a month, nor more than a month; if it was intercalated²⁰⁶, it is not intercalated.”

footnotes: ²⁰⁵ Babli 11a, Tosephta 2:8. The Tosephta here follows the Yerushalmi text, which allows for a “month”, i. e., either 29 or 30 days. The Babli prescribes 30 days; it notes 29 as permissible only for Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel (II). The computed calendar in this matter follows the Babli. ²⁰⁶ For a different number of days.

²⁰⁷6:13, Šeqalim 1:2 (46a l.51). The text from here to the end of the Halakhah is essentially copied in Nedarim, explained in Notes 83–141. The short parallel in Šeqalim belongs to a different tradition. The paragraphs are alternatingly shortened and extended; they cannot be considered exact copies of one another. The Notes to the text following are restricted to indicate deviations from the text in Nedarim.“One intercalates neither in a Sabbatical year nor the year following a Sabbatical; but if it was intercalated it is intercalated. When does one usually intercalate? The year preceding a Sabbatical.” Rebbi Zeˋira said in the name of Rebbi Abbahu, that is before Rebbi permitted to import produce from outside the Land into the Land. But since Rebbi permitted to import produce from outside the Land into the Land, there is no difference between a Sabbatical and the remaining years of the Sabbatical cycle.

footnotes: ²⁰⁷ Babli 12a, Tosephta 2:9, Nedarim

²⁰⁸6:13, Notes 86–88. Both Talmudim always assume that a prophet by his office must have been a member of the High Court. Rebbi Meïr used to say: it is said, a man came from Baal Shalisha and brought to the Man of God first fruit bread, twenty loaves, etc. Since the year should have been intercalated, why did Elisha not intercalate? This teaches that it was a year of famine and people were eager for threshing floors.

footnotes: ²⁰⁸ This paragraph has been shortened and become incomprehensible. Cf. Nedarim

Some Tannaïm state: “One does not intercalate because of impurity.” Rebbi Yose²⁰⁹: R. Jehudah. This seems to be the correct quote. says, one intercalates, since we find that Hezekiah intercalated because of the impurity, as it is said: For most of the people from Ephraim, Manasse, Issachar, and Zevulun had not been purified, for they ate the Passover contrary to what is written, for Hezekiah had prayed, saying, the Eternal, the Benevolent, will pardon this. Rebbi Simeon says, even though he intercalated Nisan, it was Adar which was intercalated. Rebbi Simeon ben Jehudah said in the name of Rebbi Simeon: Hezekiah forced the community to celebrate the Second Passover.”

footnotes: ²⁰⁹ In Nedarim

Some Tannaïm state: One intercalates because of impurity. Some Tannaïm state: One does not intercalate. He who says, one does not intercalate, from the following: for they ate the Passover contrary to what is written. How does the one who says one does not intercalate, explain contrary to what is written? They intercalated in Nisan but one intercalates only in Adar. This follows what Rebbi Simon bar Zavdi said: they found the skull of Ornan the Yebusite under the altar.

It is written²¹¹ 30:19 and Ezra 7:10.: With all his heart he prepared himself to seek God, to act, and to teach law and justice in Israel. Rebbi Simon bar Zavdi and Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman. One said, with all he did for the purity of the Temple, he did not fully establish the purity of the Temple. One said, with all the good works he did, he did not fully do his duty for the purity of the Temple. It is written²¹² 29:16.: They started on the first of the first month, and on the eighth day they entered the Eternal’s Hall and sanctified the Eternal’s House for three days; on the sixteenth of the month they finished. Could they not have eliminated all idolatry from there in one day? Rebbi Idi said, because of Chaldean idols which were engraved in vermilion.

footnotes: ²¹¹ There is no such verse in the Bible. The text is a combination of 2Chr. ²¹² 2Chr.

Six things did Hezekiah do; with three they agreed, with three they did not agree. He dragged his father’s bones on a bier of ropes, he smashed the bronze snake, and he hid the table of medicines; they agreed. He closed the upper Giḥon spring, and he cut down the Temple doors, and he intercalated Nisan in Nisan; they disagreed.

One does not intercalate before New Year’s Day; if they did intercalate it would be invalid. But for an urgent need one may intercalate immediately after New Year’s Day. Nevertheless, only Adar is intercalated. ²¹³ˋit 10:2 (Notes 41–55) and Roš Haššanah 3:1 (58c l. 51). Rebbi says, Nisan was never lengthened. But did we not state: “If the New Moon appeared in time”? If it would appear; it did not appear. Rav said, Tishre was never lengthened. But did we not state: “If the month was long”? If it would be, it never was.

footnotes: ²¹³ This and the following paragraphs also are found in Ševi

“When they sanctified the year at Usha, on the first day Rebbi Ismael, the son of Rebbi Joḥanan ben Beroqa, led and recited following the opinion of Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel said, we did not follow this at Jabneh. On the second day, Rebbi Ḥananiah, the son of Rebbi Yose the Galilean, led and recited following Rebbi Aqiba. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel said, this we did follow at Jabneh.” But does this not mean that they sanctified it on the first and the second day? Rebbi Zeˋira in the name of Rav Ḥisda: That year was disorganized. What is “on the first, on the second”? Rav Abba in the name of Rav: The first year, the second year! But was it not stated: the first day, the second day?

If they sanctified it before its time or after its lengthening, should I assume it was lengthened? The verse says, them, them; not these are My holidays? Before its time, the 29 day; after its lengthening, the 32 day. From where that one intercalates for the year because of the diaspora²¹⁵ who set out but did not yet arrive? The verse says, the Children of Israel. Make the holidays so they can be observed by all of Israel. Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman said, only if they had reached the river Euphrates.

footnotes: ²¹⁵ The Babylonians who come to Jerusalem in caravans to celebrate Passover.

“One intercalates a year only in Judea, but if it was intercalated in Galilee it is validly intercalated. Ḥanina from Ono testified that, if it cannot be intercalated in Judea, one intercalates in Galilee.” One does not intercalate a year outside the Land; if it was intercalated, it is not validly intercalated. Look at it, one does not intercalate in Galilee; could one intercalate outside the Land²¹⁷? One does not intercalate in Galilee; but if it was intercalated it is validly intercalated. One does not intercalate outside the Land; if it was intercalated it is not intercalated if it was possible to intercalate in the Land of Israel; but if one cannot intercalate in the Land of Israel, one intercalates it outside the Land.

footnotes: ²¹⁷ Why has the prohibition of intercalation outside the Land to be mentioned at all? Could this prohibition not be inferred from the rule for Galilee?

Jeremiah intercalated outside the Land. Ezechiel intercalated outside the Land. Baruch ben Neriah intercalated outside the Land. Ḥanania the nephew of Rebbi Joshua intercalated outside the Land. Rebbi sent him three letters through Rebbi Isaac and Rebbi Nathan. In one he wrote, to His holiness Ḥanania. And in one he wrote, the kid goats you left behind became rams. And in one he wrote, if you do not accept, go to the thistle desert, do the slaughtering and let Onias sprinkle. After the first [letter], he honored them. After the second, he honored them. After the third, he wanted to disgrace them. They said to him, you cannot do that since you already did honor us. Rebbi Isaac rose and read in the Torah: These are the holidays of Ḥanania the nephew of Rebbi Joshua. They said to him, the holidays of the Eternal. He told them, that is with us. Rebbi Nathan rose and concluded: For from Babylonia will Torah go forth and the Eternal’s word from Nahar-Peqod. They said to him, for from Zion will Torah go forth and the Eternal’s word from Jerusalem. He told them, that is with us. He went to complain about them to Rebbi Jehudah ben Bathyra at Nisibis. He said to him, follow them, follow them. He said to him, I do not know whom I left there. Who would tell me that they are knowledgeable in computations as I am? If they did not know the computations, they should listen to him. Since they are knowledgeable in computations as he is, he has to listen to them. He got up and rode on a horse. Where he reached, he reached. Where he did not reach, they continued to follow the corrupt [calendar].

It is written: to the outstanding Elders in the diaspora. The Holy One, praise to Him, said: The Elders of the diaspora are very dear to me. But more beloved by Me is a small group in the Land of Israel than a great Synhedrion outside the Land. It is written: The craftsmen and the smiths one thousand, and you say so? Rebbi Berekhiah in the name of Rebbi Ḥelbo and the rabbis. Rebbi Berekhiah said, one thousand craftsmen and one thousand smiths. But the rabbis say, together one thousand. Rebbi Berekhiah in the name of Rebbi [Ḥelbo said]²¹⁸, these are the Fellows; but the rabbis say, these are the councilmen.

footnotes: ²¹⁸ Added from the consensus of the parallel texts, missing here.

Rebbi Hoshaia, when he received witnesses at Kallirhoë, used to say to them: you should know the importance of the testimony that comes from your mouths; how much rent money depends on your mouths. Rebbi Abuna said, if it is so, it is even a matter of criminal law. If somebody sleeps with a girl three years and one day old, he is stoned. The court decides to lengthen, if he sleeps with her he is not stoned. Rebbi Abun said, I am calling to Almighty God, to the God Who decides with me. If a girl is three years and one day old, if the court decides to lengthen her hymen does (not) repair itself, otherwise it does [not] repair itself²¹⁹.

footnotes: ²¹⁹ The text here obviously is wrong, but is correct in the parallel texts. It is talmudic doctrine that a girl becomes nubile one day after her third birthday. If she should have been raped before that day, her hymen will regrow and she remains a virgin; after that day the deflowering is definitive. It is stated that her body will follow the calendar decreed by the court.

“The leaning of Elders and the breaking of the calf’s neck by three [judges], the words of Rebbi Simeon, but Rebbi Jehudah says, by five.” ²³⁰ 9:1. The commentary, Notes 32–45, also applies here. In the Babli, the parallels are Sanhedrin 13b, Sotah 44b. What is the reason of Rebbi Simeon? “[The Elders] shall lean,” two. No court has an even number of members; one adds another one; that makes three. What is the reason of Rebbi Jehudah? “They shall lean,” two. “The Elders,” two. No court has an even number of members; one adds one; that makes five. And for the calf whose neck is broken, ²³¹ 9:1 Note 33. The argument of R. Jehudah (attributed here to R. Simeon) is explicit in Mishnah Sotah 9:1. The corrected text, treating R. Jehudah’s opinion before R. Simeon’s, follows the Babli which as a matter of principle insists on strict chronological order. what is the reason of Rebbi Simeon? “Your Elders,” two, “and your judges,” two. No court has an even number of members; one adds one; that makes five. What is the reason of Rebbi Jehudah? “Your elders, your judges,” two. No court has an even number of members; one adds another one; that makes three. Rebbi said, the words of Rebbi Jehudah are reasonable for the breaking of the neck, for he does not refer to “they shall go out.” The words of Rebbi Simeon are reasonable for the leaning of the hands, for he does not refer to “they shall lean.” If you would say that the words of Rebbi Jehudah are reasonable for the calf whose neck is broken, if he refers to “they shall lean”, he also should refer to “they shall go out.” It turns out that you have to say “they shall go out” two, “your Elders” two, “and your judges” two. No court has an even number of members; one adds one more; that makes seven. How does Rebbi Simeon explain “your Elders and your judges”? Your Elders who are your judges. It was stated: Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob says “your Elders,” that is the High Court; “and your judges,” these are king and High Priest.

footnotes: ²³⁰ A very similar text is in Sotah ²³¹ The arguments of rabbis Simeon and Jehudah have to be switched; cf. Sotah

It was stated: Leanings by three [judges]. Is not leaning the same as leanings²³² imply that is not implied by the Mishnah?? There²³³27:23. In the Babli, 13b, this usage is labelled as that of the Galilean R. Johanan. Modem usage naturally follows the Babli., they call ordination “leaning”.

footnotes: ²³² What does the baraita ²³³ In Babylonia, ordination is called “leaning of the hands,” in imitation of Num.

Rebbi Abba said, in earlier times²³⁴, every one was ordinating his students; for example Rabban Joḥanan ben Zakkai ordained Rebbi Eliezer and Rebbi Joshua²³⁵, Rebbi Joshua Rebbi Aqiba, and Rebbi Aqiba Rebbi Meïr and Rebbi Simeon²³⁶ its historical accuracy is in doubt since it counts among the five also R. Jehudah, who belongs to the school of R. Eliezer, not R. Joshua.. He said, Rebbi Meïr shall preside; the face of Rebbi Simeon became yellow. Rebbi Aqiba told him, it is enough that I and your Creator recognize your power²³⁷ 3:1, Note 25.. They changed and honored this dynasty²³⁸, saying: If a court ordained without the consent of the Patriarch, their ordination is no ordination, but if the Patriarch ordained without consent of the court, his ordination is ordination. They changed again²³⁹ and instituted that neither shall the Court ordain without consent of the Patriarch, nor the Patriarch without consent of the Court.

footnotes: ²³⁴ Before the war of Bar Kokhba. ²³⁵ Before his time, one finds neither formal ordination nor the title “Rebbi”. ²³⁶ In the tradition of the Babli, both were ordained, together with three others, by R. Jehudah ben Bava. This tradition is questioned by the Babli itself, loc. cit.; ²³⁷ In the tradition of both Talmudim, R. Simeon is a higher authority than R. Meïr; cf. Terumot ²³⁸ In the time of the reconstruction after the war of Bar Kokhba, when the authority of the Patriarch became a political necessity. The dynasty is Hillel’s family, reputed to be of Davidic descent. ²³⁹ Under Rebbi’s successors, who had neither learning nor standing to act alone.

It was stated: From earlier times²⁴⁰ˋed qatan 3:5 (82a l. 48) does not have the introduction. [The text in Moˋed qatan is somewhat shortened in the Leiden ms. and editio princeps but the full text is in the Ashkenazic fragments published by J. Sussman, Kobez al Yad 12(1994) p.70.] A somewhat enlarged text in the Babli, Yebamot 39b. is ascribed to R. Jehudah., one was writing documents of ḥalîṣah²⁴¹: Before X and V²⁴² did Z daughter of U perform ḥalîṣah for V son of W, by coming before us, removing his shoe from his right foot, spitting before us visible spittle on the ground, and saying: So shall be done to the man unwilling to build his brother’s house²⁴³. 25:9..

footnotes: ²⁴⁰ Meaning that the text is traditional; its first author is unknown. The parallel in Mo ²⁴¹ Needed by the widow to be able to remarry in another jurisdiction. ²⁴² There should be three names mentioned here since the court must have three members. ²⁴³ Deut

It was stated: From earlier times²⁴⁰ˋed qatan 3:5 (82a l. 48) does not have the introduction. [The text in Moˋed qatan is somewhat shortened in the Leiden ms. and editio princeps but the full text is in the Ashkenazic fragments published by J. Sussman, Kobez al Yad 12(1994) p.70.] A somewhat enlarged text in the Babli, Yebamot 39b. is ascribed to R. Jehudah. one was writing documents of repudiation²²³ Chapter 13.: Before X and Y²⁴² did Z daughter of U repudiate V son of W, by coming before us: I do not like him, I do not want to stay with him, I do not agree to be married to him²⁴⁴ 107b, this is the required oral declaration of repudiation. The Babli has no document of repudiation; neither have medieval formularies..

footnotes: ²⁴⁰ Meaning that the text is traditional; its first author is unknown. The parallel in Mo ²²³ The repudiation of a marriage by an underage girl, married off by her mother or brothers after her father’s death and whose marriage during her minority is valid only rabbinically; cf. Yebamot ²⁴² There should be three names mentioned here since the court must have three members. ²⁴⁴ In the Babli, Yebamot

²⁴⁵ 4:3, Notes 63–68. In the order of subjects, the sources differ from one another. Rebbi Joḥanan said, if somebody redeemed Temple dedications for more than their worth, it is redeemed²⁴⁶. But if somebody redeemed Second Tithe for more than its worth, it is not redeemed. What is the difference between dedications and Second Tithe? ¹ The text in Maˋaser Šeni shows that the text is garbled; the text which belongs here is the other one starting with “R. La said,” with Note 248.²⁵³ Rebbi La said, dedications have claimants, Second Tithe has no claimant. Rebbi Jonah asked, that is following him who says that it is not his property²⁴⁹ˋaser Šeni4:3, Note 67.. But for him who says it is his property, what is the difference between dedications and Second Tithe? Rebbi Yose said, the reason has already been explained: dedications have claimants, Second Tithe has no claimant.

footnotes: ²⁴⁵ This piece is a composite of two paragraphs in Maˋaser Šeni ²⁴⁶ These rules are purely rabbinical in character. ¹ This is a non sequitur. ²⁵³ This is the appropriate answer to the question following Note 252. The Temple treasurer may attach the dedicator’s property to collect the fifth; redemption of Second Tithe is a private matter. ²⁴⁹ This refers to R. Meïr’s opinion regarding Second Tithe; cf. Ma

²⁵⁰ 4:3 Note 66.) Rebbi Zeˋira asked before Rebbi Immi: If the person was checked and he said, that was not what I intended? He answered him, when he will be checked.

footnotes: ²⁵⁰ This belongs after the text noted 248 and refers to the answer given in Note 248 (cf. Maˋaser Šeni

Rebbi Joḥanan said, if somebody redeemed Temple dedications without adding its fifth it is redeemed²⁵¹ 27:13,15,19.. But if somebody redeemed Second Tithe dedications without adding its fifth, it is not redeemed²⁵² 4:2) is not supported by a verse.. What is the difference between dedications and Second Tithe? ²⁴⁸ Rebbi La said, because a person usually adds to his dedications. Rebbi Jonah asked, that is following him who says that it is not his property²⁴⁹ˋaser Šeni4:3, Note 67.. But for him who says it is his property, what is the difference between Second Tithe and dedications? Rebbi Yose said, did you not already give the reason? Because a person usually adds to his dedications.

footnotes: ²⁵¹ Even though adding the fifth in general is a biblical obligation; Lev. ²⁵² Even though the obligation of adding a fifth to the redemption money (Mishnah Maˋaser Šeni ²⁴⁸ If a person overpays for redemption of his Temple dedications, it is a natural thing to do. But if he overpays for Second Tithe, the amount set aside for consumption in Jerusalem would be a mixture of sacred and profane money. ²⁴⁹ This refers to R. Meïr’s opinion regarding Second Tithe; cf. Ma

It was stated: “Temple dedications by three [appraisers].” That is, if one dedicated the body of a field. But if he said, I am vowing a mina for the Temple, ²⁵⁴ 4:4 (75b l. 16ff., מ). let us hear from the following: “Appraisal of movables by three [appraisers].” Do there exist appraisals not of movables²⁵⁵ 27:1–8. Money always is movable.? Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa, Rebbi Simeon bar Abba in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina: If somebody says, I am vowing my appraisal, and comes to settle his debt by real estate, one appraises it by ten [people], by movables by three²⁵⁷ 27:8), not for dedications of specified sums. The reduction, based on what he can afford, is determined by a committee of three which must include a Cohen. If the poor person paid only part of the reduced sum and then becomes rich, the original sum is reinstated as soon as he can afford it. If the poor person made his vow (in the Megillah version for 100 minas) in order to induce God to make him rich so he may fulfill his vow, it might be in the interest of the Temple to wait with the collection of the debt until the person became affluent.. Is one who says, I am vowing my appraisal not like one who says, I am vowing my field’s value²⁵⁶? But if he said, I am vowing a mina for the Temple, one appraises him by three [people]. Should he become rich, he will be judged by what he can afford²⁵⁷ 27:8), not for dedications of specified sums. The reduction, based on what he can afford, is determined by a committee of three which must include a Cohen. If the poor person paid only part of the reduced sum and then becomes rich, the original sum is reinstated as soon as he can afford it. If the poor person made his vow (in the Megillah version for 100 minas) in order to induce God to make him rich so he may fulfill his vow, it might be in the interest of the Temple to wait with the collection of the debt until the person became affluent..

footnotes: ²⁵⁴ From here to the end of the Halakhah there exists a copy in Megillah ²⁵⁵ By definition, “appraisals” refers to the sums of money detailed in Lev. ²⁵⁷ This is difficult to understand; since the text is confirmed by two copies, it cannot be emended. By biblical law, a reduction of payments for the poor is mandated only for appraisals (Lev. ²⁵⁶ Since the rules of appraisal are the same in both categories. ²⁵⁷ This is difficult to understand; since the text is confirmed by two copies, it cannot be emended. By biblical law, a reduction of payments for the poor is mandated only for appraisals (Lev.

²⁵⁸ 11:6 (כ), explained there in Notes 116–128. The final paragraph, while also found in Megillah, makes sense only in Ketubot. The sentence in brackets is not in the text here, it is from Ketubot, but is necessary to provide continuity of the text. It was stated: One does not make public tender for slaves, securities, and movables. [What is public tender?] Rebbi Jehudah ben Pazi said, announcement. Ulla bar Ismael said, slaves lest they flee, securities and movables lest they be stolen. Rebbi Abba bar Cohen asked before Rebbi Yose: Does this not imply that a slave be redeemed in front of three people? He answered him, yes. But did we not state: “Real estate nine and a Cohen. The same holds for humans”? He answered him, but the human here is a free person. Ḥanania bar Šelemiah in the name of Rav: A case came before Rebbi who wanted to act following the rabbis. Rebbi Eleazar ben Proteus, the grandson of Rebbi Eleazar ben Proteus, said to him: Rebbi, did you not teach us in your grandfather’s name, “except if he offered public tender”? He answered, yes, changed his mind, and acted following Rabban Gamliel.

footnotes: ²⁵⁸ The origin of these paragraphs is in Ketubot

“Capital crimes [are judged] by 23.” ²⁶⁵ Rebbi Abbahu asked: Following Rebbi Meïr, should an ox which is stoned have to pay damages by a court of three and be stoned by 23? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun told him, the rules of an ox which is stoned are all about money; it is a decision of the verse that it should be stoned.

footnotes: ²⁶⁵ End of Halakhah 1, Notes 103–106.

General²⁶⁶ אגנטוס asked Rebbi²⁶⁷ Joḥanan ben Zakkai: the bull shall be stoned, also its owner shall die²⁶³. 21:29.? He answered, the robber’s²⁶⁸ partner is like the robber. When he had left, his students asked him, rabbi, this one you pushed away with a cane²⁶⁹; what are you telling us? He said to them, it is written, the bull shall be stoned, also its owner shall die, like the owner’s death sentence so is the ox’s death sentence. Since the owner’s death sentence would be by a court of 23, investigation²⁷⁰ and cross-examination²⁷¹, so the ox’s death sentence is by a court of 23, investigation and cross-examination²⁷² 21:29..

footnotes: ²⁶⁶ Greek ἡγεμῶν “leader, commander.” In 19c l. 61 (Note 366) his name is Antoninus, in 19d l. 4 (Note 373) Antigonos. The story has many parallels in which various forms of the name appear. Jastrow and Krauss think of Quietus, a general of Trajan not likely to have conversed with a person who died under Vespasian. A Genizah text shows that אגנטוס is the correct form. {Perhaps it is not a name but a title, εὐγενής “noble, well-born.”(E. G.)} ²⁶⁷ His title should be Rabban. ²⁶³ Ex ²⁶⁸ Greek, λῃστής, ληϊστής. ²⁶⁹ Since the owner is not executed, the answer cannot be correct. ²⁷⁰ An exact investigation into the circumstances of the crime; the evaluation of the evidence is within the purview of the court. ²⁷¹ The determination when, where, and how the crime was committed. Discrepancies in testimony about these questions make prosecution impossible; cf. Mishnah 5:1–2. ²⁷² Mekhilta dR. Simeon ben Ioḥai

MISHNAH: One judges neither a tribe²⁷³, nor a false prophet²⁷⁴ 18:20., nor the High Priest²⁷⁵, except by the court of 71 [judges]. One may start a war of choice²⁷⁶ only by the court of 71 [judges]³³⁴. One may add to the City²⁷⁷2:2. or to the Temple courtyards only by the court of 71 [judges]. One appoints high courts for the tribes²⁷⁸ 16:19. only by the court of 71 [judges]. One declares a town as deviant²⁷⁹13:13–19. only by the court of 71 [judges]; one does not declare a border town as deviant, nor three together, but one may declare one or two.

footnotes: ²⁷³ According to the Halakhah, either the head of the tribe or a case in which one of the parties is a tribe. The only court of 71 members was the Supreme Court, Mishnah 6. ²⁷⁴ Deut. ²⁷⁵ Accused of a crime. ²⁷⁶ Any war except a defensive war started by an outside attacker. ³³⁴ He is known for the correctness of his historical traditions. For the political functions of a Synhedrion, an even number of members is acceptable. The judicial functions were exercised by committees of 23 each. ²⁷⁷ The part of Jerusalem where sacrifices may legally be eaten. Cf. Mishnah Ševuot ²⁷⁸ Required by Deut. ²⁷⁹ A town collectively practicing idolatry, which must be destroyed, Deut.

HALAKHAH: “One judges neither a tribe,” etc. Come and look: One does not try two people together²⁸⁰, so much less an entire tribe? Rebbi Mattaniah said, the Mishnah speaks of the head of the tribe²⁸¹. Rebbi Eliezer²⁸² said, the Mishnah speaks about a forested area between two tribes²⁸³.

footnotes: ²⁸⁰ Mishnah 6:8. ²⁸¹ A criminal trial. In the Babli, 15b, this is reported in the name of a Rav Mattanah. ²⁸² Read: R. Eleazar. ²⁸³ A border dispute.

Rebbi Zeˋira said, it says here “criminal” and it says there “criminal”, the prophet said it criminally²⁸⁴ 18:22, the law of the false prophet. “Here” refers to the judge who refuses to obey the rulings of the Supreme Court, who acts criminally in his disobedience and is tried before the Supreme Court, Deut. 17:8–12.. Since about “criminal” used there, the verse speaks about a false prophet, also about “criminal” used here, the verse speaks about a false prophet²⁸⁵ should be used only if the word in question is not loaded with additional meaning. But in Sifry Deut. 178, the expression “criminal” is interpreted to mean that the false prophet may be prosecuted only if criminal intent can be shown, not if he acted in error. In the Babli, 16a, the argument is in the name of R. Yose ben Hanina.. Rebbi Ḥizqiah said, it says here “spoke” and it says there, that the prophet would speak in the Eternal’s name. Since about “spoke” used there, the verse speaks about a false prophet, also about “spoke” used here, the verse speaks about a false prophet.²⁸⁶ should not be about the verb דִּבֵּר but the noun דָּבָר “pronouncement”, referring to the judgment of the Supreme Court in case of the rebellious judge, Deut. 17:10, and the false prophet who pronounces in the Eternal’s name, Deut. 18:20.

footnotes: ²⁸⁴ Deut. ²⁸⁵ The verse does not speak about a false prophet but about a lower court judge who refuses to accept the authority of the Supreme Court. What is meant is that the procedural details given for the treatment of the rebellious judge also apply to the treatment of the false prophet. The argument is known as הֶקֵּשׁ “trap”. If the same word is used in two contexts, details found in one context and left indeterminate in the other can be transferred from one to the other. As a hermeneutic principle, heqqeš ²⁸⁶ It seems that the heqqeš

“One may start a war of choice only by the court of 71 [judges]²⁸⁷. ²⁸⁸ 2:2: “One only adds to the city and the Temple courtyards by king and prophet, Urim and Tummim, the Synhedrion of 71 members, two thanksgiving sacrifices, and song.” Only the walled part of the city of Jerusalem counts as “before the Eternal”, where family sacrifices may be consumed (*Deut.*12:18,14:23); the suburbs are “countryside” which does not count for pilgrimage and sacrifice. Since there were no Urim and Tummim in the Second Temple, Pharisees did not consume sacrifices in the parts of Jerusalem which were added in Hasmonean and later times (Note 306). In Ševuot, only beginning and end of the discussion here are quoted as a reference. Rebbi Jehudah says, as at the start: ²⁸⁹ 24:19, speaking of David going to buy the Temple area.David ascended following Gad’s word, that is king and prophet. ²⁹⁰ 3:1. The verse is misquoted in several places.Solomon started to build the Temple of the Eternal, Israel’s God, on Mount Moriah where He had appeared to him, there are Urim and Tummim. ²⁹⁰ 3:1. The verse is misquoted in several places.To his father David, this is the Synhedrion, ²⁹¹ 32:7. The persons one asks to get definitive answers to all questions of religion are the members of the High Court of 71 members.ask your father and he will tell you, your Elders and they will speak to you. Song, after them went Hoshaia and half the officers of Judea²⁹² 12:32. This refers to the members of the Synhedrion walking behind the thanksgiving sacrifices (Ševuot 15b); the musical part of the ceremony is described in verses 41,42.. Thanksgiving sacrifices, I put up two large thanksgiving sacrifices being in procession going to their right on the wall going to the dung gate²⁹³ 12:31.. Rebbi Samuel bar Yudan said, what is written, walking? No, being in procession, only being taken by others²⁹⁴ 15a and Tosephta Sanhedrin 3:4, not the animals were carried but the leavened bread required for a thanksgiving sacrifice (Lev. 7:13). It is possible that this is meant here..

footnotes: ²⁸⁷ This probably should be deleted. ²⁸⁸ The following four paragraphs do not refer to the quote of the Mishnah but are a commentary to Mishnah Ševuot ²⁸⁹ 2S. ²⁹⁰ 2Chr. ²⁹⁰ 2Chr. ²⁹¹ Deut. ²⁹² Neh. ²⁹³ Neh. ²⁹⁴ In his opinion, the sacrifices were not walked on the wall but were carried. In the opinion of the Babli, Ševuot

Rav Huna bar Ḥiyya²⁹⁵ 16b, he is referred to as Rav Shimi bar Hiyya (in one ms. Shimi bar Ashi; this can be disregarded, replacing a hapax by a frequently quoted name). in the name of Rav quotes it from the words of the Torah. As all that I am showing you, the shape of the building and the shape … of all its vessels, so you shall execute²⁹⁶ 25:9. The final clause in the sentence seems to be redundant; it is explained as referring to future buildings.. So you shall execute in all generations. Moses is king and prophet. Aaron represents Urim and Tummim. Assemble for me seventy men from the Elders of Israel²⁹⁷ 11:16., that is the Synhedrion; ask your father and he will tell you, etc. Song, after them went Hoshaia and half the officers of Judea. Thanksgiving sacrifices, I put up two large thanksgiving sacrifices being in procession going to their right on the wall going to the dung gate. Rebbi Samuel bar Yudan said, what is written, walking? No, being in procession, only being taken by others.

footnotes: ²⁹⁵ In the Babli, Sanhedrin ²⁹⁶ Ex. ²⁹⁷ Num.

²⁹⁸ 15b, the entire paragraph. How did the processions go? The elder Rebbi Ḥiyya and Rebbi Simeon ben Rebbi. One said, one opposite the other; the other said, one after the other; both are explaining the same verse: The second thanksgiving sacrifice went לְמוּל and I after it²⁹⁹ 12:38, in MT למואל. According to Gesenius, one has to read מוּאל as contraction of מֵאֲוַל “not first, not with it”. This justifies both meanings quoted here, “opposite” and “after”.. He who said, one opposite the other, and he dwells opposite me³⁰⁰ 22:5.. But he who said, one after the other, he should break off its head behind its neck³⁰¹. 5:8.. For him who said, one opposite the other, it turns out that every place was purified by one thanksgiving sacrifice³⁰²; for him who said, one after the other, it turns out that every place was purified by two thanksgiving sacrifices³⁰³. For him who said, one after the other, this is correct following what he had stated: “the inner one is being eaten, the outer one is being burned.³⁰⁴ˋanit 6. The Babli, loc. cit. ²⁹⁹ suggests that the first makes sacrifices possible; therefore, it has to be burned outside the Temple. The second one then is a legitimate thanksgiving sacrifice, most of which has to be eaten by the priests as public well-being sacrifice (Mishnah Zevahim 5:5).” For him who said, one opposite the other, what is the inner one? The one closer to the Temple. Rebbi Yasa in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: It was eaten on the instruction of a prophet³⁰⁵. Rebbi Zeˋira said, they state there: Since a prophet is there, for what do I need Urim and Tummim³⁰⁶? It was found stated: Rebbi Jehudah says, Urim and Tummim are needed³⁰⁷ 16a, it is a dispute among Babylonian Amoraïm whether Nehemiah’s ceremony, without king and oracle, was a valid dedication of the rebuilt city of Jerusalem or whether it was a token ceremony to re-establish the intrinsic sanctity of Jerusalem created by Solomon’s Temple. The quote here, from an otherwise unknown baraita, qualifies the second opinion as minority opinion of a Tanna..

footnotes: ²⁹⁸ Ševuot ²⁹⁹ Neh. ³⁰⁰ Num. ³⁰¹ Lev ³⁰² In principle, one sacrifice would suffice if the procession went around the entire wall. ³⁰³ Since we do not expect two sacrifices for the same purpose, one has to find differences of purpose for the two. ³⁰⁴ Tosephta 3:4, Megillat Ta ³⁰⁵ Who defined the meaning of “inner” and “outer”? ³⁰⁶ The nature of the Urim and Tummim oracle already was no longer known when the Second Temple was built; Nehemiah (7:65) uses the expression “the coming of a Cohen with Urim and Tummim” assynonym with “the coming of the Messiah.” The requirement of Urim and Tummim disqualifies all parts of Jerusalem not forming part of Solomon’s city. ³⁰⁷ In the Babli, Ševuot

Rebbi Abbahu said, Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqush disagreeed. One said, one builds and afterwards one dedicates³⁰⁸ 3:3,6.. The other one said, one dedicates and afterwards one builds³⁰⁹ 8:6). If the outline of the Temple enclosure or the original city walls was still visible in Zerubabel’s time, no rebuilding was necessary in order to restore the service of the altar.. For him who says, one builds and afterwards one dedicates, one does not say that the partitions are as if built up³¹⁰. If one desires to add to the Temple Hall, by which means does one add³¹¹ ²⁹⁹, insists that the sacrifice be used in the place to be dedicated. This leads to a catch-22 situation since a sacrifice can be dedicated only after the dedication of the holy place. There is no reason to assume that the Yerushalmi accepts this reasoning.? By the two loaves³¹² 23:17. This is in imitation of the leavened bread used for the dedication of the city, cf. ²⁹⁵. A parallel discussion is in the Babli, Ševuot 15a/b.. Does one dedicate on a holiday³¹³ 58:13. In addition, the Babli points out that the dedication of the leavened breads is the slaughter of the accompanying well-being sacrifice; then the dedication would not be by bread.? Then by the Shew Bread. Does one dedicate on the Sabbath³¹⁴ 24:8. It becomes available for secondary use on the Sabbath, when it cannot be so used.? Then in the night³¹⁵. Does one dedicate in the night³¹⁶ 30:2 prescribes that the Tabernacle be erected during daytime. This rule then is extended to include all building activity of the Temple.? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, with a baked flour offering³¹⁷ 6:12–16.. One understands that on their return from the diaspora they sacrificed and then dedicated. When they entered the Land,³¹⁸ with what did they dedicate? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, with two thanksgiving sacrifices coming from Nob³¹⁹ 14:7. and Gibeon.

footnotes: ³⁰⁸ One builds as if the buildings were profane. Only when the Temple enclosure is complete does one dedicate the Temple area, and when the walls of Jerusalem are rebuilt does one dedicate the city. During the building period one is not restricted by all the rules applying to the Temple area. This is possible since the dedication by Solomon was annulled by the destruction of the Temple. One has to assume that it is possible to dedicate the area of the altar and its enclosure without dedicating the Temple, as done in the time of the first return from Babylonia under Cyrus, Ezra ³⁰⁹ He holds that the dedication by Solomon is permanent. Therefore, anybuilding must be done under restrictive rules (but it can be built in stages, cf. Mishnah Idiut ³¹⁰ They actually have to be restored before Temple service can be resumed whole or in part. ³¹¹ In imitation of the rules given for dedication of the city of Jerusalem under Nehemiah, any dedication must involve a sacrifice. The Babli, loc. cit. ³¹² The two loaves of leavened bread dedicated on Pentecost to permit use of new wheat, Lev. ³¹³ Since the dedication has far-reaching legal consequences, it has the status of an acquisition, which is not acceptable on Sabbath or holiday, Is. ³¹⁴ The Shew Bread is removed from the sanctuary on the Sabbath, Lev. ³¹⁵ The following evening, after the end of the Sabbath. ³¹⁶ Ex. ³¹⁷ The daily flour offering of the High Priest, Lev. ³¹⁸ When they entered the Land, they had the Tabernacle which was dedicated in the desert. What one asks here is, how was Solomon’s Temple dedicated? ³¹⁹ The priests’ settlement at Nob already was destroyed at the time when the priests from Nob resided at Anatot. The active place of worship was Gibeon, but “Nob and Gibeon” is used as a legal term to indicate the status of holy places after the destruction of Shiloh, before the building of the Temple; cf. Mishnah Zevahim

³²⁰ exists in another three versions: Tosephta 3:4 (T), Babli Ševuot 15b (B), Megillat Taˋanit 6 (M). A detailed discussion of all four texts, to be used with due caution, is in Note 22 to volume 3 of H. Graetz’s Geschichte der Juden.“Abba Shaul says, two subdivisions³²¹ “marsh.” M has “places on the Mount of Olives”, an emendation by a person who did not understand the text. were there, the lower and the upper, whose sanctification was not complete. The lower one was dedicated with a full ceremony, but the upper one only when they came from the diaspora, without a king and without Urim and Tummim. Therefore, in the lower one the vulgar³²² p. 349. eat family sacrifices and Second Tithe; Fellows eat there family sacrifices but not Second Tithe³²³. In the upper one, the vulgar eat family sacrifices but not Second Tithe³²⁴; Fellows eat there family sacrifices and Second Tithe³²⁵. Why did they not sanctify it? Because it was the vulnerable spot of Jerusalem; it could be conquered from there³²⁶.”

footnotes: ³²⁰ This baraita ³²¹ ביצין corresponds to the readings of B,T, בצעין, ביצעין, ביצועין by degeneration of the guttural. One has to accept Graetz’s derivation from בצע “to split” against Rashi’s marais ³²² For the notions of “vulgar” and “Fellow”, cf. Introduction to Tractate Demay, ³²³ Since family sacrifices have more holiness than Second Tithe, one has to accept the reading of M: “family sacrifices and certainly Second Tithe.” ³²⁴ Because these were living quarters in the expanding city. ³²⁵ Read with B,T,M: “neither family sacrifices nor Second Tithe.” ³²⁶ This defines the "upper subdivision" as the suburb between the second, Herodian wall and the incomplete third wall of Agrippas I. The lower subdivision then is the part of the old city between the Hasmonean and Herodian walls. Since the third wall could not be completed, the dedicated part of the city could not be expanded there. The subdivision is called upper because it slopes upwards from the Damascus gate to the North. The lower subdivision could have been dedicated by a ceremony imitating Nehemiah's .

“One only appoints high courts for the tribes.” The verse says³²⁷, for your tribes, they shall judge.

footnotes: ³²⁷ Deut. 16: 18. For the argument behind the quote, cf. Makkot 1:17 (Note 74), Babli 16b.

“One only declares a town to be deviant.” Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Hoshaia: ³²⁸ Three Amoraïm, one says, one makes³²⁹ one but not two. The other said, clusters one makes³³⁰, dispersed ones one does not make. The other said, dispersed³³¹ one does not make at all, lest Gentiles spread and come to the Land of Israel; some want to say that enemies should not spread and lay waste.

footnotes: ³²⁸ In the Babli, 16b, the first opinion is attributed to Rav, the converse of the second to R. Simeon ben Laqish, the third opinion to R. Johanan. ³²⁹ No court is empowered to declare more than one town as deviant at the same time. ³³⁰ Two neighboring towns can be considered as one. There is no need to emend the Yerushalmi to follow the Babli. ³³¹ This should read, or be interpreted as, “border town” as in the Mishnah.

MISHNAH: The High Synhedrion³³² had 71 members and a lower one 23 members. From where that the High Court has 71 members? For it is said³³³ 11:16.: Assemble for me 70 men of the Elders of Israel, and Moses was presiding, that makes 71. Rebbi Jehudah says, 70³³⁴. From where that a lower court has 23 members? For it is said, the congregation shall judge, the congregation shall save³³⁵ 35:24,25 speaking of the trial of the homicide; cf. Sifry Num. #160.. One congregation judges, one congregation saves, this makes twenty. And from where that a congregation consists of ten persons? As it is said, how long this evil congregation³³⁶ 14:27, interpreted as speaking of the ten bad spies., without Joshua and Caleb. From where that one adds another three³³⁸? From the interpretation of what is said³³⁹ 23:2: Do not follow the majority to do evil; do not testify in a quarrel, to bend, to twist after the majority. This is read to mean that for acquittal one vote is enough but that for conviction one needs a qualified majority even without the one judge who is voting. Cf. Mekhilta dR. Ismael Mišpaṭim20, dR. Simeon ben Ioḥai 23:2 (in the name of Rebbi.), do not follow the majority to be unfavorable, I understand that He said, follow them to be favorable. Then why was it said, to bend after the majority? Your bending to be favorable is not equal to your bending to be unfavorable. Your bending to be favorable shall be by one [vote] (witness), your bending to be unfavorable shall be by two. Since no court may be even-numbered, one adds another one to obtain 23. How many people shall live in a town that it may have a criminal court? 120. Rebbi Nehemiah said 230, that they might be commanders over tens³⁴⁰ 18:21, *Deut.*1:15, each judge must be qualified at least to be the leader of ten men..

footnotes: ³³² As usual in rabbinic sources, the political institution of the Synhedrion is identified with the juridical of the High Court, projecting Jabneh arrangements into Temple times. ³³³ Num. ³³⁴ He is known for the correctness of his historical traditions. For the political functions of a Synhedrion, an even number of members is acceptable. The judicial functions were exercised by committees of 23 each. ³³⁵ Num. ³³⁶ Num. ³³⁸ Since Mishnah 6 established that a criminal court must have 20 judges/jurors. ³³⁹ Ex. ³⁴⁰ Since the verse requires that judges be outstanding personalities, Ex.

HALAKHAH: “The High Synhedrion,” etc. ³³⁷ 7:3, Notes 106–108, is repeated in Megillah 4:4 (75b l. 7), Babli 23b, and is alluded to in Sanhedrin4:10. Rebbi Abba, Rebbi Yasa in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: It says here “congregation”, and it says there “congregation”, how long the evil congregation. Since “congregation” there means ten, so here also ten. Rebbi Simon said, it is said here “amid”, and it is said there “amid”. Since “amid” there means ten, so here also ten. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun told him, if you want to infer from “amid”, there are too many. But it is said here “the sons of Israel”, and it is said there, “the sons of Israel”, the sons of Israel came to buy grain. Since “the sons of Israel” there were ten, so here also ten.

footnotes: ³³⁷ This is not a repetition of the Mishnah. The paragraph really does not refer to the qualifications of a court but to the requirement of having 10 adult males in attendance for religious observations of a “congregation.” The paragraph is an almost complete quote from Berakhot

“From where that one adds another three, etc. It was stated: ³⁴¹ 2:9. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel said, in earlier times the ketubah of qualified women³⁴² 4:4. was signed only by priests, Levites, or Israel whose daughters were qualified to marry into the priesthood. ³⁴³ represents a very idealized past. Rebbi Yose said, in earlier times there was no disagreement in Israel³⁴⁴ 2; the statement declares all non-rabbinic sects as non-Jewish. but the Synhedrion of 71 members were sitting in the free-stone hall³⁴⁵; two courts of three³⁴⁶ members each were sitting, one in the glacis³⁴⁷ and one on the Temple Mount³⁴⁸; and a court of 23 was sitting in every town of the Land of Israel. If somebody had a question of religious practice, he went and asked it from the court in his town. If they had heard [the answer], they told him; otherwise he and their distinguished member went and asked a court in their neighborhood. If these had heard [the answer], they told him; otherwise he and their distinguished member went and asked from the court on the Temple Mount. If these had heard [the answer], they told him; otherwise he and their distinguished member went and asked from the court on the glacis. If these had heard [the answer], they told him; otherwise they together entered the High Court in the free-stone hall since from there instruction came accepted in all of Israel, as it is said: From this place which the Eternal will choose³⁴⁹ 17:10. Disobedience of a High Court ruling is only a capital crime if the ruling was delivered from “the place”, from a court sitting in a room partially on Temple grounds. When the High Court lost its standing as court of criminal appeals (Note 31) and left the free-stone hall, it also lost its ability to prescribe practice ex cathedra.. Even though the Synhedrion in the free-stone hall had 71 members, those present never numbered less than 23. If one of them had to leave, he was looking around; if 23 others were present, he would leave, otherwise he would not leave³⁵⁰ 45a.. They were in session from the daily morning sacrifice to the daily evening sacrifice. On Sabbaths and holidays, they were sitting in the study hall on the Temple Mount³⁴⁸. If a question of practice came up, if they had heard the answer, they told them; otherwise they prepared to vote. If a majority was for acquitting, they acquitted. If a majority³⁵¹ was for a guilty verdict, they rendered a verdict of guilty. If a majority was for declaring pure, they declared pure. If a majority was for declaring impure, they declared impure. From the time that there were many students of Shammai and Hillel who did not study enough under their teachers, many disagreements arose and two doctrines developed³⁵² 47b.. From there³⁵³, they were sending to all towns in the Land of Israel; any time they found a person who was wise, meek, even-tempered, benevolent, pleasing, humble, good-hearted, with good intentions, and well endowed, they were placing him on the court of the Temple Mount³⁵⁴, from there to the court on the glacis, and from there to the High Court in the free-stone hall.

footnotes: ³⁴¹ Tosephta 7:1, Hagigah ³⁴² Whose offspring were qualified to marry into the priesthood. In Temple times, this could serve as proof of qualification; cf. Qiddušin ³⁴³ Most of the following text also is in the Babli, 88b. R. Yose, the collector of most of the material of Seder ˋOlam, ³⁴⁴ A patently incorrect statement. The ancient rabbinic disagreement about the treatment of private sacrifices on holidays is the topic of Ḥagigah ³⁴⁵ Adjacent to the Temple, built into the Herodian Temple wall, constructed from large rectangular stones without mortar. ³⁴⁶ Read: 23. However, A. Weiss (לשאלת טיב בית דין של שבעים ואחד, ספר היובל לכ׳ לוי גינצבורג, ע׳ קץ-רטז New York 1946) insists that the only courts of 23 in Jerusalem were committees of the court of 71. ³⁴⁷ The space between the Temple wall and a smaller wall surrounding the Temple areas. ³⁴⁸ Outside any enclosure. ³⁴⁹ Deut. ³⁵⁰ Babli Soţah ³⁴⁸ Outside any enclosure. ³⁵¹ In his theory, on appeal only a simple majority is needed. ³⁵² Babli Soţah ³⁵³ The free-stone hall. ³⁵⁴ In all three Babylonian texts, the person is appointed judge in his town and the appeals courts replenished from sitting judges.

The Synhedrion was like a threshing floor in the shape of a semi-circle; the president sat in the middle so they might see him and hear his voice. Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Ṣadoq said, when Rabban Gamliel was sitting at Jabneh, my father and his brother were sitting to his right and the Elders to his left, to honor the old man³⁵⁵.

footnotes: ³⁵⁵ The “old man” was R. Sadoq, a member already of Rabban Johanan ben Zakkai’s school in pre-war Jerusalem.

³⁵⁶ 6 (a Šeïlta). how many were the judges of Israel³⁵⁷? 78’600. Appointed over a thousand, 600. Appointed over a hundred, 6’000. Appointed over fifty, 12’000. Appointed over ten, 60’000. It turns out that the judges of Israel were 78’600.

footnotes: ³⁵⁶ Halakhah 10:2 Note 214. Babli 18a, Tanhuma Mišpaṭim ³⁵⁷ Appointed by Moses. The numbers are inexact since in no census were there exactly 600’000 men.

³⁵⁸ What is the reason of Rebbi Nehemiah? That there should be a court of 23, and the parties, and the witnesses, and the witnesses for perjury, and the witnesses for perjury of the witnesses for perjury, and the rabbi, and the clerks of court, and the beadle. What is the reason of the rabbis? That there might be twelve courts for the twelve tribes.

footnotes: ³⁵⁸ This paragraph is thoroughly corrupt. In the Babli, 17b, a very forced count connects the 120 men required by the rabbis to a court of 23 acting as a law school to 3•23 = 69 students. Cf. also Tosephta 3:9. If one adds to the 35 people enumerated for R. Nehemiah the 69 law students mentioned in Mishnah 4:10, one arrives at a minimum number attributed in the Tosephta to R. Jehudah; but no emendation can be trusted.

“And Moses was presiding.” ³⁵⁹ 21, Tanhuma Buber Bemidbar 25, Num. rabba 4(9), shortened Babli 17a. Moses found a way to settle things. When the Holy One, praise to Him, told him, count all male firstborns among the Children of Israel³⁶⁰ 3:40. The reference should have been to vv. 46,47 where Moses was commanded to collect 5 šeqel per person from 273 of the 22’273 firstborn of the 11 tribes. The other 22’000 were redeemed by the service of 22’000 Levites. Since he was instructed to take the 5 šeqel from 273 persons, he could not simply collect 1’365 šeqel from 22’273 persons., he said, who will consent voluntarily to give five sheqel per head? What did he do? He took 22’000 tickets³⁶¹ and wrote on them “Levite” and 273 on which he wrote “five sheqel” and put all of them in an urn³⁶². He told them, come and take your ticket. To any one who drew a ticket saying “Levite” he said, a Levite already redeemed you. To anybody who drew a slip saying “five sheqel” he said, what can I do, it is from Heaven; Rebbi Jehudah³⁶³. But Rebbi Nehemiah the Tanna objected to the colleagues: If you had given me the possibility of a Levite, it would have come up for me.³⁶⁴ But the following is what he did. He took 22’000 tickets³⁶⁵ and wrote on them “Levite” and two hundred seventy three on which he wrote “five sheqel” and put all of them in an urn. He told them, come and take your ticket. To any one who drew a slip saying “Levite” he said, a Levite already redeemed you. The anybody who drew a ticket saying “five sheqel” he said, what can I do, it is from Heaven. The Tanna objected to the colleagues: Think of it, if all came up as “Levite”³⁶⁶” or that all of the 273 extra tickets would be drawn is practically zero. (The first probability starts with a string of 117 zeroes after the decimal point, the second with 639.) If all 273 extra tickets were actually drawn, it was a clear sign from Heaven.? They told him, it was miraculous and they came up alternatingly. Rebbi Samuel said, in the opinion of the second Tanna, it was a miracle. In the opinion of the first Tanna, it was not a miracle³⁶⁷” were drawn, these slips were drawn with approximately constant frequency, about 122.6 per 10’000 draws, against the probabilistic frequency of 121.1 per 10’000. One cannot say that alternatingly “Levite” and “5 šeqel” were drawn since then the drawing would have ended after 546 draws.. They told him, it was a miracle in any case since they came up alternatingly.

footnotes: ³⁵⁹ Tanhuma Bemidbar ³⁶⁰ Num. ³⁶¹ Greek πιττάκιον “ticket, label, etc.” ³⁶² Greek κάλπη, “urn”. ³⁶³ The Midrash sources make it clear that the preceding was R. Jehudah’s opinion; the following is R. Nehemiah’s. The Babli only mentions R. Jehudah’s opinion. ³⁶⁴ Since there were only 22’273 tickets, it was a mathematical necessity that 273 people would have to pay. The distribution of these was a pure matter of probabilities; there is no reason to invoke Heaven in the matter. ³⁶⁵ The parallel sources, and the paragraph after the next, make it clear that one has to read: 22’273 tickets reading “Levite”. ³⁶⁶ Assuming that the tickets in the urn are well mixed and all tickets have the same probability to be drawn, the probability that in 22’273 drawings of 22’546 tickets no slip of “5 šeqel ³⁶⁷ While in the first scenario by necessity 273 tickets of “5 šeqel

³⁶⁸ 5a, Num. rabba 4(7). General Antoninus³⁶⁹ קונטרוקוס, in Num. rabba הונגטיס; cf. Note 267. asked Rabban Joḥanan ben Zakkai: The sum is deficient, the details are excessive. He told him, these 300 were firstborn of the priesthood; no holy one redeems a holy one³⁷⁰ 3, the families of the Levites were reported as Gershon 7’500, Qehat 8’600, Merari 6’200, for a total of 22’300. But in the summation in v. 39 only 22’000 are reported and this number reappears as the number of Levites freeing firstborns from payment. Instead of “priesthood” one has to read “Levites”..

footnotes: ³⁶⁸ Babli Bekhorot ³⁶⁹ In Bekhorot ³⁷⁰ In the census reported in Num.

³⁷¹ 11, Tanhuma Buber Behaˋalotekha 22, Sifry Num. 95, Num. rabba 15(14), Yalqut Šimˋony 736, Babli 17a. Similarly. the Eternal said to Moses, assemble for Me seventy men of the Elders of Israel³³⁴. Moses said, if I am taking six per tribe, there will be 72, ten of six each and two of five, which tribe will agree to be discriminated against? What did he do? He took 70 tickets and wrote on them “Elder”, two he left blank, and put them in an urn. He told them, come and take your ticket. To any one who drew a slip saying “Elder” he said, from Heaven they appointed you. To anybody who drew a blank slip he said, what can I do, it is from Heaven; Rebbi Jehudah³⁶³. But Rebbi Nehemiah the Tanna objected to the colleagues: If you had given me the possibility of an Elder, it would have come up for me.³⁶⁴ But the following is what he did. He took 72 tickets and wrote on them “Elder” and two blank ones and put all of them in an urn. He told them, come and take your ticket. To any one who drew a slip saying “Elder” he said, from Heaven they appointed you. The anybody who drew a blank slip he said, what can I do, it is from Heaven. The Tanna objected to the colleagues: Think of it, if all came up as “Elder”? They told him, it was miraculous and they came up alternatingly³⁷³. Rebbi Samuel said, I objected before Rebbi Abbahu: in the opinion of the second Tanna, it was a miracle. In the opinion of the first Tanna, it was not a miracle. He told him, it was a miracle in any case since they came up alternatingly³⁷⁴.

footnotes: ³⁷¹ Tanhuma Behaˋalotekha ³³⁴ He is known for the correctness of his historical traditions. For the political functions of a Synhedrion, an even number of members is acceptable. The judicial functions were exercised by committees of 23 each. ³⁶³ The Midrash sources make it clear that the preceding was R. Jehudah’s opinion; the following is R. Nehemiah’s. The Babli only mentions R. Jehudah’s opinion. ³⁶⁴ Since there were only 22’273 tickets, it was a mathematical necessity that 273 people would have to pay. The distribution of these was a pure matter of probabilities; there is no reason to invoke Heaven in the matter. ³⁷³ The probability of at least one of the blank tickets remaining in the urn, assuming uniform distribution (thorough mixing) of the tickets, was 0.14316. ³⁷⁴ I. e., about evenly spaced.

³⁷⁵ 5a. General Antigonos³⁷⁶ asked Rabban Joḥanan ben Zakkai: Your teacher Moses either was a thief or he did not know how to compute, for it is written: a beqaˋ per head³⁷⁷ 38:25,26 (in the LXX, ed. A. Rahlfs, 39:2,3) where it is stated that the Temple tax of a beqaˋ, half a šeqel, paid by 603’550 men came to 100 kikkar 1775 šeqel. The LXX follows rabbinic tradition in identifying the beqaˋ, the Babylonian zuz, with the drachma, i. e., the šeqel with the dupondius, and the kikkar(Accadic gaggarum “disk”) with the talent of 60 minas or 6’000 drachmas, i. e. 3’000 šeqel (cf. Qiddušin 1:1, Note 122.) But in Qiddušin 1:3 Note 339 it is declared that any šeqel mentioned in the Torah is a Roman tetradrachma. Then the silver contributed should have been twice the recorded amount, 201 talents 550 šeqel.. If you make the centenarius 100 pounds,³⁷⁸ weighing 100 drachmae is the natural weight equivalent of the Greek mina in coin. The centenarius,“hundredweight”, 100 pounds, is taken as the equivalent of the talent. But if by šeqel a tetradrachma is meant, a talent should have been 120 mina, not 60 as usual, and not 100 as presumed here. Computed from above, one-sixth is missing in the latter, half in the former case. he stole one sixth. If you make it 60 pounds, he stole half. He answered him, our teacher Moses was a trustworthy treasurer expert in computations. He answered him, is it not written, they contributed bronze twenty talents³⁷⁹.; for us that makes 96 pounds³⁸⁰ make a *mina,*2’400 drachma are 96 mina. Nevertheless, the verse mentions šeqel, not mina. and he mentions them in detail. He answered back, because it does not add up to a centenarius; if you would say that it added up to a centenarius, he would have stolen half. He told him, but it is written 1’775, would that not make 71 pounds³⁸¹ each. and he mentions it in detail. He answered back, if you would say that it added up to a centenarius, he would have stolen half. He told him, but it is written, the sheqel is 20 gera, twenty sheqel, twenty-five sheqel, twenty-five sheqel the maneh³⁸².shall be for you³⁸³ 45:12; the correct text, intended here, is: 20 šeqel, 25 šeqel, 15 šeqel make a maneh, for a total of 60. Therefore, it is impossible to identify the Greek mina as 25 šeqel. Cf. Qiddušin 1:2 Note 204.; the talent of the Holy One, praise to Him, was double. He answered back, he³⁸⁴ was a trustworthy treasurer and expert in computations.

footnotes: ³⁷⁵ A different version is in the Babli, Bekhorot ³⁷⁶ In G, אגנטוס, cf. Note 267. ³⁷⁷ The discussion is about Ex. ³⁷⁸ The libra ³⁷⁹ A scribal error; in the verse (and G): 70 talents. The total recorded was 70 talents, 2’400 šeqel ³⁸⁰ Since 25 tetradrachma ³⁸¹ @ 25 tetradrachma ³⁸² The Babylonian mina ³⁸³ Ez. ³⁸⁴ Read with G: “Your teacher Moses.”