[6a - 32 lines; 6b - 56 lines]

1)[line 1] PELIGEI RABANAN ALEI D'RABAN SHIMON BEN GAMLIEL- the Rabanan (whose opinion Shmuel referred to) disagree with Raban Shimon ben Gamliel [and maintain that even Din may be determined by two judges]

2)[line 3] ?GAVRA A'GAVRA KA RAMIS?- (the Gemara answers with a rhetorical question) are you posing a contradiction between two [equal] authorities (namely, the Amora'im Shmuel and Rebbi Avahu) [who may disagree with each other]?

3)[line 6] DAN ES HA'DIN- if [an individual who is not authorized to judge by himself (i.e., not a Mumcheh la'Rabim; see Background to 5:1)] judged a case

4)[line 6] ZIKAH ES HA'CHAYAV- he acquitted [the litigant] who was [Halachically] responsible [after which he personally removed money from the other litigant and handed it to the one whom he acquitted (33a)]

5a)[line 8] MAH SHE'ASAH ASUY- what he did is done; i.e., the ruling stands [and the litigant who benefited monetarily need not return the money, and that which the judge transferred Tum'ah to remains Tamei]

b)[line 8] U'MESHALEM MI'BEISO- but [the judge] must pay [he who unjustly lost money or Tahor produce] from his own personal funds

6)[line 9] KIBLUHU ALAIHU- they accepted his [ruling] upon themselves [regardless of its Halachic accuracy]

7)[line 11] ?D'TA'AH B'MAI?- in what area did he err [such that his ruling was Halachically invalid]?

8)[line 12] / TA'AH BI'DVAR MISHNAH / TA'AH B'SHIKUL HA'DA'AS - Categories of Mistaken Rulings

(a)A judge whose ruling contravenes Halachah may have erred in one of two ways. The first type of mistaken ruling is that of a judge who was "Ta'ah bi'Dvar Mishnah." This means that he forgot a Halachah that was explicitly stated in a Mishnah or Gemara. In such a case, the ruling is Halachically considered to have never taken effect, and any resulting consequences of the ruling are reversed.

(b)The second type of mistaken ruling is that of a judge who was "Ta'ah b'Shikul ha'Da'as." In the case of such a ruling, the Halachah is subject to dispute, and was never explicitly resolved one way or another in a Mishnah or Gemara. However, the Halachah is commonly accepted to follow one of the opinions. Since an opposite ruling still has some basis, such an error is not automatically overturned. Rather, the judge who erred in this fashion must pay he who was wronged from his own personal money (see Sanhedrin 33a).

9)[line 17] SUGYAN D'ALMA ALIBA D'CHAD MINAIHU- the prevailing custom is to rule according to one of the opinions

10)[line 19] LEIMA K'TANA'EI- let us suggest that [the disagreement of Shmuel and Rebbi Avahu over whether or not two Dayanim may pass judgment] is the subject of a Tana'ic dispute

11)[line 19]BITZU'A- lit. apportioning; compromise. "Bitzu'a" is equal in meaning to "Pesharah." Those opinions that require a panel of three judges even for compromise refer to it as "Bitzu'a," which connotes a careful calculation, similar to the way in which one "breaks bread" ("Botze'a") and gives to those who are sharing his meal. Those who do not require three judges refer to compromise as "Pesharah," which literally means to "cool down" hot water by adding cold water to it. This word therefore does not imply as much exactitude as "Bitzu'a" (TOSFOS HA'ROSH DH Bitzu'a).

12)[line 20]SEVARUHA- [the students of the Yeshivah] thought

13)[line 21] MAKSHINAN PESHARAH L'DIN (HEKESH - A Comparison of Two Subjects Mentioned Together in One Verse or Neighboring Verses)

(a)One of the methods employed by Chazal when determining Halachah from the verses of the Torah is "Hekesh." A Hekesh entails comparing two subjects that are mentioned together in one verse or neighboring verses.

(b)A Hekesh is a powerful way of determining Halachah. When two subjects are compared through a Hekesh, all possible parallels are drawn between them, unless a different Derashah teaches us otherwise ("Ein Hekesh l'Mechetzah"). Additionally, Pirchos (logical differences) that would impede a Kal va'Chomer (see Background to Bava Kama 24:43) or a Gezeirah Shavah (see Background to Bava Kama 40:9a) do not stand in the way of learning one subject from another through a Hekesh ("Ein Meshivin Al ha'Hekesh").

(c)Our Gemara suggests that both Rebbi Meir and Chachamim compare Din and Pesharah through a Hekesh. This Hekesh is found in a verse that refers to "Mishpat u'Tzedakah" (see 5b, line 25). "Mishpat" refers to Din, whereas "Tzedakah" refers to Pesharah (see Insights).

14)[line 22] MAR SAVAR DIN B'SHENAYIM- [the Chachamim] maintain that Din requires two [judges, in which case Pesharah would require no more than one, since if it does not require three judges, then it rather depends on the acquiescence and Kinyan (see below, entry #19) of the two litigants (as the Gemara proceeds to explain)]

15)[line 25] LEIMA TELASA TENA'EI B'PESHARAH- let us suggest that there are three Tana'ic opinions regarding compromise

16)[line 26] MAR SAVAR B'SHENAYIM- [Rebbi Shimon ben Gamliel (quoted at the bottom of 5b)] maintains [that compromise may be reached only] through two [judges]

17)[line 28]ITEIMA- some say

18)[line 30] KI HEICHI D'LEIHAVU ALEI SAHADEI- so that [the two judges] should function as witnesses to [the agreement]

19)[line 31] PESHARAH EINAH TZERICHAH KINYAN- a compromise does not require [the litigants who agreed to it to perform] an action that effects the acquisition [from one to the other] (see, for example, Background to Bava Basra 75:99 and Gitin 77:42)

20a)[line 31] TISGEI B'TREI- two (or even one) [judge/s] should suffice

b)[line 31] !V'LIKNEI MINEI!- and let [one litigant] acquire from [the other, in which case the compromise does not require a Beis Din to take effect any more than a gift given willingly does]!

21)[line 31] PESHARAH TZERICHAH KINYAN- compromise requires an act of acquisition [even when three judges preside over it, and yet two or fewer judges may still not arrange a compromise even when a Kinyan is made out of fear that they are not well-versed enough in the art (TOSFOS DH Tisgei)]


22)[line 1] NIGMAR HA'DIN- once the verdict has been delivered [through the judges' proclamation of, "So-and-so - you are acquitted, and so-and-so - you are convicted" (Gemara below, line 54)]

23)[line 1]RASHAI- permitted

24)[line 1](" " )(SRMSH BNKSH SIMAN)- This mnemonic device appears to refer to the names of the Amora'im who author the teachings that follow regarding the topic of "Botze'a." The eight letters in the Siman stand for the first or dominant letter of the names of each Amora:

1."S" () - "Rebbi Eliezer son of Rebbi Yosi ha'Glili" (line 2)

2."R" () - "Rebbi Eliezer" (line 12)

3."M" () - "Rebbi Meir" (line 15)

4."SH" () - "Rebbi Yehoshua ben Korchah" (line 19)

5."B" () - "Rebbi" (line 29)

6."N" () - "Rebbi Shimon ben Menasya" (line 40)

7."K" () - "Reish Lakish" (line 45)

8."SH" () - "Rebbi Yehoshua ben Korchah" (line 48).

25)[line 4]HA'MEVARECH- (in this context) one who praises

26)[line 4]MENA'ETZ- blasphemer

27)[line 5]"... [] , '""... [U']VOTZE'A BERECH NI'ETZ HASH-M"- "... [and] a thief congratulates [himself, saying,] 'I have blasphemed HaSh-m [and gotten away with it]!'" (Tehilim 10:3). Rebbi Eliezer son of Rebbi Yosi ha'Gelili interprets this verse to mean, "... [and] one who praises a compromise has blasphemed HaSh-m."

28)[line 5] YIKOV HA'DIN ES HA'HAR- "may the law pierce the mountain"; i.e., strict justice is best in all circumstances

29)[line 6]"[ , , ,] ...""[LO SAGURU MIPENEI ISH,] KI HA'MISHPAT LE'L-KIM HU..."- "[Do not show favoritism in judgment, listen to great and small [matters] alike; fear no man,] for judgment is in the province of G-d..." (Devarim 1:17). Rebbi Eliezer son of Rebbi Yosi ha'Glili interprets this verse to mean, "... for it is judgment that G-d prefers...."

30)[line 8] , , OHEV SHALOM, V'RODEF SHALOM, U'MESIM SHALOM BEIN ADAM LA'CHAVEIRO- would love peace, pursue peace, and foster peace between man and his fellow man. This means that Aharon would (a) make an all-out attempt to repair relationships that had turned sour before the former friends had a chance to sue each other in court (RASHI); (b) was allowed to effect a compromise since, unlike his brother Moshe, he was not a judge (TOSFOS DH Aval) (see Insights)

31)[line 9]" , ; , ""TORAS EMES HAYESAH B'FIHU, V'AVLAH LO NIMTZA BI'SEFASAV; B'SHALOM UV'MISHOR HALACH ITI, V'RABIM HESHIV ME'AVON"- "The Torah of truth was in his mouth, and violation was not found upon his lips; he walked with Me in peace and conscientiousness, and turned away many from sin" (Malachi 2:6). This verse refers to the early Kohanim - namely, Aharon, his son Elazar, and his grandson Pinchas.

32)[line 12]SE'AH- approximately 7.2, 8.29, or 14.4 liters, depending upon the differing Halachic opinions

33a)[line 13]TACHANAH- he ground it [into flour]

b)[line 13]AFA'AH- he baked it [into bread]

34)[line 13]HIFRISH- he separated

35)[line 13]CHALAH - The Portion of Dough Given to a Kohen

See Background to 5:45.

36)[line 15]" , '""U'VOTZE'A BERECH NI'ETZ HASH-M"- "... and a thief congratulates [himself, saying,] 'I have blasphemed HaSh-m [and gotten away with it]!'" (Tehilim 10:3). Rebbi Eliezer interprets this verse to mean, "... and a thief who utters a blessing over that which he has stolen has blasphemed HaSh-m."

37)[line 16]" , ' ...?'""VA'YOMER YEHUDAH EL ECHAV, 'MAH BETZA KI NAHAROG ES ACHINU...?'"- "And Yehudah said to his brothers, 'What profit [will we gain] if we murder our brother...?'" (Bereishis 37:26). (See Insights.)

38)[line 20]"... ""... EMES U'MISHPAT SHALOM SHIFTU B'SHA'AREICHEM"- "... judge truth and judgments of peace within your gates" (Zecharyah 8:16).

39)[line 28] ASA'AN L'TANA KAMA- (the following explanation) follows the opinion of the first Tana [quoted earlier - namely, Rebbi Eliezer son of Rebbi Yosi ha'Glili - who maintains that it is forbidden for a judge to effect a compromise]

40)[line 30] SHILEM LO MI'TOCH BEISO- [the judge] paid [the poor man] from his own personal funds

41a)[line 31] MISHPAT L'ZEH- it is a judgment for this [victorious litigant]

b)[line 31] U'TZEDAKAH L'ZEH- and it is charity for this [poor man, who lost the case]

42)[line 37] " ", "" !HAI "L'CHOL AMO," "LA'ANIYIM" MIBA'I LEI!- (according to the above explanation,) that [which the verse (Shmuel II 8:15; see above, line 35) states that David ha'Melech performed charity] "for all of his nation" should rather state [that he performed charity] "for the poor"!

43)[line 41] AD SHE'LO TISHMA DIVREIHEM- before you hear their arguments

44)[line 42] L'HEICHAN DIN NOTEH- to which side the law leans

45)[line 44]" ; , ""POTER MAYIM REISHIS MADON; V'LIFNEI HISGALA, HA'RIV NETOSH"- "Like one who bores a hole in a dike is he who instigates an argument; before [your shame] is revealed, abandon the quarrel" (Mishlei 17:14). Rebbi interprets this verse to mean, "One who wishes to defuse an argument (which is compared to water) must do so before judgment commences; before the law is revealed, abandon the quarrel [and pursue peace]."

46a)[line 46]RACH- a cooperative, accommodating individual

b)[line 46]KASHEH- an argumentative, cantankerous individual

47)[line 47] NIZKAK LACHEM- beholden to you [to judge your case]

48)[line 47]RODFO- chase after [the judge in an attempt to convince him to overturn his ruling]

49)[line 48]"... ...""... LO SAGURU MIPENEI ISH..."- see above, entry #29

50)[line 50] LO SACHNIS DEVARECHA MI'PNEI ISH- do not withhold your words before a man [for fear of his reaction]

51a)[line 50] ES MI HEN ME'IDIN- Whom they are testifying for. The Gemara (8a) explains that one who causes money to be unjustly transferred from one person to another inconveniences HaSh-m, as it were, to arrange for the money to be returned to its rightful owner.

b)[line 50] LI'FNEI MI HEN ME'IDIN- before Whom they are testifying

c)[line 50] MI ASID LI'PARA ME'HEN- Who will exact vengeance from them in the future [for testifying falsely]

52)[line 51]" '...""V'AMDU SHNEI HA'ANASHIM ASHER LA'HEM HA'RIV LI'FNEI HASH-M..."- "And the two men, they who have the argument, shall stand before HaSh-m..." (Devarim 19:17). The Gemara (Shevuos 30a) explains that the men referred to in the verse are the witnesses.

53)[line 52]"... ...""... EL-KIM NITZAV BA'ADAS K-L..."- "... El-kim stands among the assembly of G-d..." (Tehilim 82:1). The "assembly of G-d" is a reference to the judges of Beis Din.

54)[line 52]YEHOSHAFAT- a righteous ruler who reigned for twenty-five years; the fourth king of Yehudah

55)[line 52]" , ' ! , '; '""VA'YOMER EL HA'SHOFTIM, 'RE'U MAH ATEM OSIM! KI LO L'ADAM TISHPETU, KI LA'SH-M; V'IMACHEM BI'DVAR MISHPAT'"- "And [Yehoshafat] said to the judges, 'Pay close attention to what you are doing! For it is not by command of man that you judge, but rather that of HaSh-m; and He is with you in the matter of judgment'" (Divrei ha'Yamim II 19:6). Yehoshafat warned the judges to be careful not to judge unjustly. Although they may be able fool flesh-and-blood into thinking that they had made an honest error, HaSh-m would know if it was truly intentional.

56)[line 53] , " ?"SHEMA YOMAR HA'DAYAN, "MAH LI B'TZA'AR HA'ZEH?"- [for] perhaps a judge may say [to himself], "Why do I need this grief [of possibly making an error in judgment and being punished as a result]?"

57a)[line 53] , "[] "TALMUD LOMAR, "[V']IMACHEM BI'DVAR MISHPAT"- the verse therefore teaches, "[and] He is with you in the matter of judgment" [which implies that G-d assists a judge whose intentions are noble]

b)[line 54] EIN LO L'DAYAN ELA MAH SHE'EINAV RO'OS- a judge has naught to rely upon but the evidence before him (lit. what his eyes see) [and he will therefore not be punished for doing so]

58)[line 55] K'REBBI YEHOSHUA BEN KORCHAH- according to the opinion of Rebbi Yehoshua ben Korchah [who earlier ruled that it is a Mitzvah to effect a compromise (line 19)]

59)[last line] , ?IY DINA BE'ISU, IY PESHARAH BE'ISU?- would you (plural) prefer [a ruling according to] strict law, or [one based upon] compromise?