הרי שהיה מצטער על מעות שהניח לו אביו ובא בעל החלום ואמר לו כך וכך הן במקום פלוני הן של מעשר שני הן זה היה מעשה ואמרו דברי חלומות לא מעלין ולא מורידין
Translation: If someone was distressed over money that his father left him, and a dream-interpreter came and said to him, "Such-and-such amount is in such-and-such a place, and it is Maaser Sheni money" - this actually happened, and they said: Words of dreams neither raise nor lower (meaning, dreams have no legal relevance).
(a)If the money is found in that place, it indicates that the dream is true; so why does it have no legal relevance?
1.Eitz Yosef, Ben Yehoyada: Chazal tell us (Berachos 55a) that there is no dream that does not contain something meaningless. We assume that the actual status of the money as Maaser Sheni was the meaningless matter.
2.Toras Chaim: It is reasonable to assume that, while the dream was accurate about the location of the money, his imagination then added a false detail to the story.
3.Ein Eliyahu: Since there is no decisive proof that the money is Maaser Sheni, we presume it is ordinary money, based on its original status.
30b----------------------------------------30b
רבי שמעון בן אליקים הוה משתקיד עליה דר' יוסי ברבי חנינא למסמכיה ולא קא מיסתייע מילתא יומא חד הוה יתיב קמיה דר' יוחנן אמר להו מי איכא דידע הלכה כרבי יהושע בן קרחה או לא א"ל רבי שמעון בן אליקים דין ידע אמר ליה לימא איזו אמר ליה ליסמכיה מר ברישא סמכיה אמר ליה בני אמור לי כיצד שמעת א"ל כך שמעתי שמודה ר' יהושע בן קרחה לרבי נתן אמר לזה הוצרכתי השתא ומה עיקר ראיה בהדי הדדי אמר ר' יהושע בן קרחה לא בעינן הגדה מיבעיא א"ל הואיל ועלית לא תרד אמר ר' זירא שמע מינה גברא רבה כיון דסמיך סמיך
Translation: R. Shimon ben Elyakim was constantly striving to ordain R. Yosi bar R. Chanina but he was not successful. One day he was sitting before R. Yochanan, who said to them: "Who knows whether the Halacha is like R. Yehoshua ben Korcha or not?" R. Shimon ben Elyakim answered, "This one (R. Yosi bar R. Chanina) knows." He said to him, "If so, let him say." He said to him, "Let the Master first ordain him." R. Yochanan did so. He said to him, "Son, tell me how you heard it." He said to him - This is what I heard: R. Yehoshua ben Korcha admitted to R. Nasan. R. Yochanan said 'For this I needed (to ordain him)?! If, regarding the main aspect, seeing the incident, R. Yehoshua ben Korcha says that the witnesses need not have seen it together; then when it comes to relating the testimony, is it even necessary to say that they do not need to testify together?! He said, 'Since you have ascended, you shall not descend.' R. Zeira said: From this we learn that once a man is ordained, he remains ordained (and we do not cancel it)."
(a)Why did R. Zeira say that once someone is ordained, the ordination remains? If the individual was unworthy and the ordination was a mistake, why is it still considered valid?
1.Maharshal (Mesores HaShas): This only applies to a great man. The text should read "כיון דאיסתמיך סמיך" - meaning that once such a person is ordained, it cannot be undone. However, this would not apply to someone unworthy or ordinary, as the Rambam writes in Hilchos Sanhedrin 4:15.
