Gemara Clarity

Sanhedrin 23a

סנהדרין כ״ג ע״א

Learn Sanhedrin 23a step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Sanhedrin 23a in Gemara Clarity

Topic

How judges are chosen for דיני ממונות, and when a litigant may reject the other side's judges or witnesses.

Overview

The משנה teaches that a money case is judged by three judges. רבי מאיר and חכמים argue about who picks the third judge, and whether a litigant can reject the other side's judges or witnesses. The גמרא first tries reading 'one' as a whole court, and deals with a borrower's right to refuse a court. Then it drops that reading: each side picks one judge and a third is added, so that a true judgment comes out. Next it explains the argument over the third judge. Everyone needs the judges to agree, and they argue only about whether the litigants must agree too. Along the way it supports רב יהודה's rule that witnesses sign only when they know who signs with them. Finally, רבי יוחנן limits rejecting judges to lay courts, and the גמרא defends this against several challenges. This leads to ריש לקיש's reading 'his witness' and the question of backing out of accepting one witness like two, which continues on the next amud.

Opening lines

מַתְנִי׳ דִּינֵי מָמוֹנוֹת בִּשְׁלֹשָׁה.

MISHNA: Monetary cases are judged by three.

זֶה בּוֹרֵר לוֹ אֶחָד,

This litigant chooses one for himself,

וְזֶה בּוֹרֵר לוֹ אֶחָד,

and that litigant chooses one for himself,

וּשְׁנֵיהֶן בּוֹרְרִין לָהֶן עוֹד אֶחָד,

and the two of them choose one more for themselves;

The steps (30)

  1. StatementThree judges, and how they are chosen
  2. StatementRejecting the other side's judge
  3. StatementRejecting the other side's witnesses
  4. ChallengeWhy does each side need to pick one, if three are enough?
  5. ResolutionThe משנה Means Each Side Picks a Whole Court
  6. ChallengeCan a Borrower Really Refuse the Court?
  7. ResolutionThe משנה Speaks of Lay Courts in Syria
  8. Resolutionרב פפא: Even Expert Courts in the Same Town
  9. ChallengeThe Rabbis' wording does not fit the 'court' reading
  10. ChallengeA second problem with the 'court' reading
  11. ResolutionBack to the plain reading: one judge each, plus a third
  12. QuestionWhy pick the judges this way?
  13. ResponseSo that a true judgment comes out
  14. QuestionSuggesting what the argument depends on
  15. StatementThe rule of רב יהודה and how it would fit each side
  16. RejectionEveryone accepts the rule; the argument is about the litigants' consent
  17. StatementReturning to רב יהודה's rule itself
  18. ProofSupport from the careful people of ירושלים
  19. ChallengeHow can a litigant reject a judge?
  20. ResolutionOnly in lay courts, not with expert judges
  21. ChallengeThe חכמים seem to show רבי מאיר spoke of experts too
  22. ResolutionFit judges are treated like experts
  23. ChallengeA ברייתא seems to show רבי מאיר argued about expert judges
  24. ResolutionThe 'expert' in the ברייתא means a judge the public chose
  25. Proofרבי מאיר himself says an expert court cannot be refused
  26. ChallengeWitnesses are like experts, yet רבי מאיר lets them be disqualified
  27. Resolutionריש לקיש fixes the wording: one witness, not witnesses
  28. ChallengeWhat would a single witness be good for?
  29. ResolutionThe litigant had agreed to treat one witness like two
  30. ChallengeWe already know from another משנה that one can back out