| (Permission is granted to redistribute this material as long as the Kollel header and the subscription info at the end are included.) |
brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Har Nof
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Email - daf@shemayisrael.co.il
_________________________________________________________________
Sanhedrin Chart #1
| (A) DISQUALIFYING A JUDGE |
(B) DISQUALIFYING A WITNESS |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1) | REBBI YOCHANAN AND REISH LAKISH(1) | Arka'os | He agreed to accept the testimony of the witness like the testimony of two witnesses(2) |
| 2) | REBBI ELAZAR | Arka'os(3) | He testifies with a second person that his opponent's witness comes from a family of slaves(4) |
| 3) | RAV DIMI IN THE NAME OF REBBI YOCHANAN | He testifies with a second person(5) | He testifies with a second person, and his opponent has a second set of witnesses(6) |
| 4) | RAVIN IN THE NAME OF REBBI YOCHANAN | He testifies with a second person(7), and he has a Migo (8) | He testifies with a second person(7), his opponent has a second set of witnesses, and he has a Migo(9) |
==========
FOOTNOTES:
==========
(1) In the Gemara's conclusion, the Gemara rejects their opinion because the
Mishnah uses the word "Edav" -- "his *witnesses*" (in the plural form, and
not "Edo" in the singular form, as the Mishnah writes in the singular form
with regard to disqualifying an opponents judge).
(2) According to this, Rebbi Meir is consistent with his own reasoning in
the Mishnah later (24a).
(3) So writes Rashi (23b, DH Amar Rebbi Elazar). See Insights there.
(4) This is what the Gemara calls "Pegam Mishpachah." See Insights for an
explanation of why the litigant is believed according to Rebbi Meir.
(5) (So it appears from the words of Ravin.) That is, the Mishnah is
referring to a case when the litigant disqualifies the judges (or witnesses)
of his opponent either through "Pegam Mishpachah" or through testifying
about any other factor which would invalidate them. The litigant is not
considered Noge'a b'Davar with regard to disqualifying the judges, because
even if he succeeds in disqualifying the present judges his opponent can
simply bring other judges. (Regarding the meaning of the Beraisa (23a) that
quotes Rebbi Meir as saying that if the judges are Mumchin, then the
litigant is not believed to disqualify them -- see Insights to 23b.)
(6) Rebbi Meir and the Rabanan are arguing whether the claimant must present
all of the evidence that he claimed to have ("Tzarich l'Varer") and he must
therefore bring *both* sets of witnesses that he claimed to have, or not.
(According to Rashi's first explanation *Rebbi Meir* maintains "Tzarich
l'Varer, while according to Rashi's second explanation the *Rabanan*
maintain "Tzarich l'Varer.")
(7) Such would seem to be the case based on a simple reading of the Gemara,
and so writes the Maharsha. (See Insights to 24a, where we cite opinions
that differ and explain that according to the Rabanan the litigant is
trusted without the support of a second witness.)
(8) That is, the litigant was already confirmed to be telling the truth
(through a pair of witnesses) with regard to disqualifying the witnesses.
(9) That is, the litigant was already confirmed to be telling the truth
(through a pair of witnesses) with regard to disqualifying the judges.
| Main Sanhedrin Page |
List of Charts and Graphics |
Insights to the Daf |
Background to the Daf |
Review the Daf Questions and Answers |
Point by Point Summary |