Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility Skip to content

Today's Daf Yomi

October 19, 2022 | 讻状讚 讘转砖专讬 转砖驻状讙

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Ron and Shira Krebs to commemorate the 73rd yahrzeit of Shira's grandfather (Yitzchak Leib Ben David Ber HaCohen v'Malka), the 1st yahrzeit of Shira's father (Gershon Pinya Ben Yitzchak Leib HaCohen v'Menucha Sara), and the bar mitzvah of their son Eytan who will be making a siyum on Mishna Shas this month.

  • This month's learning is sponsored for the refuah shleima of Naama bat Yael Esther.

  • Masechet Ketubot is sponsored by Erica and Rob Schwartz in honor of the 50th wedding anniversary of Erica's parents Sheira and Steve Schacter.

Ketubot 105

Today’s daf is sponsored by Gail Licht and family in loving memory of her father, HaRav Avraham Shaul Halevi ben Yaakov, on his yahrzeit.

Admon and Chanan were two judges (dayanei gezeirot) who ruled on various matters in which the rabbis or others disagreed with them. The last chapter of Ketubot deals with two rulings of Chanan and seven of Admon. If a husband goes abroad and his wife demands sustenance, does she need to take an oath that he did not leave her any food? Chanan and the sons of the kohanim gedolim debate at what stage/s she needs to take an oath. Later tannaim debate how to rule on this issue – like Chanan or like the sons of the kohanim gedolim. The Gemara struggles with the language of the Mishna – firstly why does it say there were two dayanei gezeirot聽when there are other sources that say three? Also, they are called dayanei gezeilot in other sources. These judges would receive their salaries from the temple treasury. Are judges allowed to take a salary? On what does it depend? Can they take money from the two sides that come to be judged? Is this like taking bribes? What is the danger of taking bribes? The Gemara brings various stories to show how far a judge needs to go to ensure that he does not show any favor to either one of the sides. One who is not able to do that in a particular case should insist on not being a judge for that case, as is highlighted in a number of the stories.

转砖讘注 讘住讜祝 讜诇讗 转砖讘注 讘转讞诇讛 谞讞诇拽讜 注诇讬讜 讘谞讬 讻讛谞讬诐 讙讚讜诇讬诐 讜讗诪专讜 转砖讘注 讘转讞诇讛 讜讘住讜祝 讗诪专 专讘讬 讚讜住讗 讘谉 讛专讻讬谞住 讻讚讘专讬讛诐 讗诪专 专讘谉 讬讜讞谞谉 讘谉 讝讻讗讬 讬驻讛 讗诪专 讞谞谉 诇讗 转砖讘注 讗诇讗 讘住讜祝

She takes an oath at the end of their marriage, i.e., when she learns that her husband died. The oath is to the effect that he did not leave her any funds when he departed overseas, as she is claiming full payment of her marriage contract. And she does not take an oath at the outset of his trip overseas, when she demands support soon after his departure. The sons of High Priests disagreed with 岣nan鈥檚 opinion and said: She takes an oath both at the outset and at the end. Rabbi Dosa ben Harkinas said: The halakha is in accordance with their statement, i.e., that of the sons of the High Priests. Rabban Yo岣nan ben Zakkai said that 岣nan spoke well: She takes an oath only at the end.

讙诪壮 讜专诪讬谞讛讬 砖诇砖讛 讚讬讬谞讬 讙讝讬诇讜转 讛讬讜 讘讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讗讚诪讜谉 讘谉 讙讚讗讬 讜讞谞谉 讛诪爪专讬 讜讞谞谉 讘谉 讗讘讬砖诇讜诐 拽砖讬讗 转诇转 讗转专讬谉 拽砖讬讗 讙讝讬专讜转 讗讙讝讬诇讜转

GEMARA: The mishna states that there were two judges who issued decrees [gezeirot] in Jerusalem. And the Gemara raises a contradiction from the following baraita: There were three judges who adjudicated cases of theft [gezeilot] in Jerusalem: Admon ben Gaddai, 岣nan the Egyptian, and 岣nan ben Avishalom. The fact that the baraita mentions three judges is difficult, as the mishna includes only two; and the fact that the judges are described in the mishna as those who issue decrees is also difficult as they are described in the baraita as judges who adjudicate cases of theft.

讘砖诇诪讗 转诇转 讗转专讬谉 诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讚讞砖讬讘 诇讬讛 拽转谞讬 讚诇讗 讞砖讬讘 诇讬讛 诇讗 拽转谞讬 讗诇讗 讙讝讬专讜转 讗讙讝讬诇讜转 拽砖讬讗

The Gemara continues: Granted, the contradiction between the statement that there were three judges and the statement that there were two is not difficult, as those who are important to him the tanna teaches in the mishna, and those who are not important to him the tanna does not teach in the mishna. Although there were other judges, the tanna mentioned only those pertinent to the topic at hand. However, the contradiction between the ruling that refers to decrees and the ruling that refers to theft is difficult.

讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讘专 讬爪讞拽 砖讛讬讜 讙讜讝专讬谉 讙讝讬专讜转 注诇 讙讝讬诇讜转 讻讚转谞讬讗 拽讬讟诪讛 谞讟讬注讛 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗讜诪专 讙讜讝专讬 讙讝讬专讜转 砖讘讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 谞讟讬注讛 讘转 砖谞转讛 砖转讬 讻住祝 讘转 砖转讬 砖谞讬诐 讗专讘注 讻住祝

Rav Na岣an bar Yitz岣k said: There is no contradiction, as they would issue decrees concerning matters of theft, as it is taught in a baraita: With regard to an animal that severed a young plant in the field of another, Rabbi Yosei says that those who issue decrees in Jerusalem said: For a plant one year old, the animal鈥檚 owner must pay two silver pieces; for a plant two years old, he pays four silver pieces.

讜专诪讬谞讛讬 砖诇砖讛 讚讬讬谞讬 讙讝讬专讜转 讛讬讜 讘讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讗讚诪讜谉 讜讞谞谉 讜谞讞讜诐 讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 诪讗谉 转谞讗 谞讞讜诐 专讘讬 谞转谉 讛讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 专讘讬 谞转谉 讗讜诪专 讗祝 谞讞讜诐 讛诪讚讬 诪讙讜讝专讬 讙讝讬专讜转 砖讘讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讛讬讛 讜诇讗 讛讜讚讜 诇讜 讞讻诪讬诐

The Gemara raises a contradiction between the baraita cited above and another baraita: There were three prominent judges who issued decrees in Jerusalem: Admon, 岣nan, and Na岣m. In the previous baraita, Na岣m was not listed. Rav Pappa said: Who is the tanna who taught that the third judge was Na岣m? It is Rabbi Natan, as it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Natan says: Na岣m HaMadi was also among those who would issue decrees in Jerusalem, but the Sages did not agree with his opinion.

讜转讜 诇讬讻讗 讜讛讗诪专 专讘讬 驻谞讞住 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讜砖注讬讗 砖诇砖 诪讗讜转 讜转砖注讬诐 讜讗专讘注讛 讘转讬 讚讬谞讬谉 讛讬讜 讘讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讻谞讙讚谉 讘转讬 讻谞住讬讜转 讜讻谞讙讚谉 讘转讬 诪讚专砖讜转 讜讻谞讙讚谉 讘转讬 住讜驻专讬诐 讚讬讬谞讬谉 讟讜讘讗 讛讜讜 讜讻讬 拽讗诪专讬谞谉 讗讙讜讝专讬 讙讝讬专讜转 拽讗诪专讬谞谉

The Gemara asks: And were there no more judges? Didn鈥檛 Rabbi Pine岣s say that Rabbi Oshaya said: There were 394 courts in Jerusalem, and a comparable number of synagogues, and a comparable number of study halls, and a comparable number of houses of teachers of schoolchildren. The Gemara answers: There were many judges, but when we say that there were a small number, it is specifically concerning those who issue decrees that we say so.

讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 讗住讬 讙讜讝专讬 讙讝讬专讜转 砖讘讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讛讬讜 谞讜讟诇讬谉 砖讻专谉 转砖注讬诐 讜转砖注 诪谞讛 诪转专讜诪转 讛诇砖讻讛 诇讗 专爪讜 诪讜住讬驻讬谉 诇讛诐 诇讗 专爪讜 讗讟讜 讘专砖讬注讬 注住拽讬谞谉 讗诇讗 诇讗 住驻拽讜 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖诇讗 专爪讜 诪讜住讬驻讬谉 注诇讬讛谉

Rav Yehuda said that Rav Asi said: Those who issue decrees in Jerusalem would take their wages, ninety-nine maneh, equal to 9,900 dinars per year, from the collection of the Temple treasury chamber. If they did not wish to do so, one adds to their wages. The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of the phrase: If they did not wish to do so? Does this mean that if they desired higher wages, they were paid more? Is that to say that we are dealing with wicked people who demand wages beyond what they need? Rather, on the contrary, Rav Asi said that if their wages were insufficient for their needs, then even if they did not wish to receive higher wages, one adds to their wages so that they may devote themselves to their communal service.

拽专谞讗 讛讜讛 砖拽讬诇 讗讬住转讬专讗 诪讝讻讗讬 讜讗讬住转讬专讗 诪讞讬讬讘 讜讚讗讬谉 诇讛讜 讚讬谞讗 讜讛讬讻讬 注讘讬讚 讛讻讬 讜讛讻转讬讘 讜砖讜讞讚 诇讗 转拽讞

The Gemara relates: The Sage Karna would take an istera, a small coin, from the innocent party, and an istera from the guilty party, i.e., he would charge both parties that came to him for judgment, and then he would judge their case. The Gemara asks: But how could he do so? Isn鈥檛 it written: 鈥淎nd you shall take no bribe鈥 (Exodus 23:8), which indicates that a judge may not take money from either of the two litigants?

讜讻讬 转讬诪讗 讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讛讬讻讗 讚诇讗 砖拽讬诇 诪转专讜讬讬讛讜 讚诇诪讗 讗转讬 诇讗爪诇讜讬讬 讚讬谞讗 拽专谞讗 讻讬讜谉 讚砖拽讬诇 诪转专讜讬讬讛讜 诇讗 讗转讬 诇讗爪诇讜讬讬 讚讬谞讗 讜讻讬 诇讗 讗转讬 诇讗爪诇讜讬讬 讚讬谞讗 诪讬 砖专讬

And if you say that this prohibition against taking a bribe applies only when a judge does not take from both parties, as there is a concern that perhaps he may come to pervert the judgment in favor of the party that gave him the bribe, whereas in the case of Karna, since he took from both parties he will not come to pervert the judgment, who says that the verse is referring only to those circumstances? Is it permitted to take a bribe even in a case when one will not pervert the judgment?

讜讛转谞讬讗 讜砖讜讞讚 诇讗 转拽讞 诪讛 转诇诪讜讚 诇讜诪专 讗诐 诇诇诪讚 砖诇讗 诇讝讻讜转 讗转 讛讞讬讬讘 讜砖诇讗 诇讞讬讬讘 讗转 讛讝讻讗讬 讛专讬 讻讘专 谞讗诪专 诇讗 转讟讛 诪砖驻讟 讗诇讗 讗驻讬诇讜 诇讝讻讜转 讗转 讛讝讻讗讬 讜诇讞讬讬讘 讗转 讛讞讬讬讘 讗诪专讛 转讜专讛 讜砖讜讞讚 诇讗 转拽讞

But isn鈥檛 it taught in a baraita: 鈥淎nd you shall take no bribe鈥 (Exodus 23:8); what is the meaning when the verse states this? If it comes to teach that one should not acquit the guilty and one should not convict the innocent due to a bribe, it is already stated: 鈥淵ou shall not wrest judgment鈥 (Deuteronomy 16:19). Rather, this verse teaches that even if the purpose of the bribe is to ensure that one acquit the innocent and convict the guilty, the Torah nevertheless says: 鈥淎nd you shall take no bribe.鈥 This indicates that it is prohibited for a judge to receive anything from the litigants, even if there is no concern at all that justice will be perverted.

讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讛讬讻讗 讚砖拽讬诇 讘转讜专转 砖讜讞讚 拽专谞讗 讘转讜专转 讗讙专讗 讛讜讛 砖拽讬诇 讜讘转讜专转 讗讙专讗 诪讬 砖专讬 讜讛转谞谉 讛谞讜讟诇 砖讻专 诇讚讜谉 讚讬谞讬讜 讘讟诇讬谉 讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讗讙专 讚讬谞讗 拽专谞讗 讗讙专 讘讟讬诇讗 讛讜讛 砖拽讬诇

The Gemara answers: This applies only when one takes the money in the form of a bribe, even if he does not intend to pervert the judgment, whereas Karna took the money in the form of a salary, not a bribe. The Gemara asks: But is it permitted to take money from litigants in the form of a salary? Didn鈥檛 we learn in a mishna (Kiddushin 58b): With regard to one who takes a salary to judge cases, his judgments are void? The Gemara answers: This applies only when he took money as his compensation for judging the case, whereas Karna accepted the money as compensation for unemployment, i.e., as he could not engage in his usual work while dealing with the case, he would take compensation for this unemployment.

讜讗讙专 讘讟讬诇讗 诪讬 砖专讬 讜讛转谞讬讗 诪讻讜注专 讛讚讬讬谉 砖谞讜讟诇 砖讻专 诇讚讜谉 讗诇讗 砖讚讬谞讜 讚讬谉 讛讬讻讬 讚诪讬 讗讬诇讬诪讗 讗讙专 讚讬谞讗 讚讬谞讜 讚讬谉 讜讛转谞讬讗 讛谞讜讟诇 砖讻专 诇讚讜谉 讚讬谞讬讜 讘讟讬诇讬谉 讗诇讗 讗讙专 讘讟讬诇讗 讜拽转谞讬 诪讻讜注专 讛讚讬讬谉

The Gemara asks: And is it permitted to take money as compensation for unemployment? Isn鈥檛 it taught in a baraita: Ugly is the judge who takes a salary to judge cases; however, his judgments are valid judgments? The Gemara clarifies: What are the circumstances of this baraita? If we say that it is referring to one who accepted money as his compensation for judging, are his judgments valid judgments? But didn鈥檛 we learn in a mishna (Kiddushin 58b): With regard to one who takes a salary to judge cases, his judgments are void? Rather, it must certainly be referring to a situation where he takes money as compensation for unemployment, and yet the baraita teaches: Ugly is the judge.

讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讘讟讬诇讗 讚诇讗 诪讜讻讞讗 拽专谞讗 讘讟讬诇讗 讚诪讜讻讞讗 讛讜讛 砖拽讬诇 讚讛讜讛 转讛讬 讘讗诪讘专讗 讚讞诪专讗 讜讬讛讘讬 诇讬讛 讝讜讝讗

The Gemara answers: This statement that the judge is ugly applies only when the fact that he is taking a salary for his unemployment is not evident, as he was not engaged in some other type of work at the time. Karna, however, would take money for his unemployment when it was evident that he was taking time off work to judge the case, as he was examining people’s wine stores [ambara] to see which casks would last and which were going sour, and they would pay him one dinar as a salary. Consequently, when Karna paused from his work to deal with a case, it was clear that he was losing money.

讻讬 讛讗 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗 讻讬 讛讜讛 讗转讬 讚讬谞讗 诇拽诪讬讛 讗诪专 诇讛讜 讛讘讜 诇讬 讙讘专讗 讚讚诇讬 诇讬 讘讞专讬拽讗讬 讜讗讬讚讜谉 诇讻讜 讚讬谞讗

This resembles an incident involving Rav Huna. When people would come for judgment before him, he would say to them: As I am unable to take time off from my work, give me a man who can draw water for me, to irrigate the fields in my place, and I will judge your case.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讛讜 讘讗 讜专讗讛 讻诪讛 住诪讜讬讜转 注讬谞讬讛谉 砖诇 诪拽讘诇讬 砖讜讞讚 讗讚诐 讞砖 讘注讬谞讬讜 谞讜转谉 诪诪讜谉 诇专讜驻讗 住驻拽 诪转专驻讗 住驻拽 讗讬谞讜 诪转专驻讗 讜讛谉 谞讜讟诇讬谉 砖讜讛 驻专讜讟讛 讜诪住诪讬谉 注讬谞讬讛谉 砖谞讗诪专 讻讬 讛砖讜讞讚 讬注讜专 驻拽讞讬诐

Rabbi Abbahu said: Come and see how blind are the eyes of those who accept bribes, and how they ruin themselves. If a person has pain in his eyes, he gives a doctor money, and even then it is uncertain whether he will be healed or whether he will not be healed. And yet those judges take the value of a peruta, a small amount of money as a bribe, and actively blind their eyes, as it is stated: 鈥淔or a bribe blinds those who have sight鈥 (Exodus 23:8).

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讻讬 讛砖讜讞讚 讬注讜专 注讬谞讬 讞讻诪讬诐 拽诇 讜讞讜诪专 诇讟驻砖讬谉 讜讬住诇祝 讚讘专讬 爪讚讬拽讬诐 拽诇 讜讞讜诪专 诇专砖注讬诐 诪讬讚讬 讟驻砖讬诐 讜专砖注讬诐 讘谞讬 讚讬谞讗 谞讬谞讛讜 讗诇讗 讛讻讬 拽讗诪专 讻讬 讛砖讜讞讚 讬注讜专 注讬谞讬 讞讻诪讬诐 讗驻讬诇讜 讞讻诐 讙讚讜诇 讜诇讜拽讞 砖讜讞讚 讗讬谞讜 谞驻讟专 诪谉 讛注讜诇诐 讘诇讗 住诪讬讜转 讛诇讘 讜讬住诇祝 讚讘专讬 爪讚讬拽讬诐

The Sages taught: 鈥淔or a bribe blinds the eyes of the wise鈥 (Deuteronomy 16:19); a fortiori it will certainly blind the eyes of fools. 鈥淎nd perverts the words of the righteous鈥 (Deuteronomy 16:19); a fortiori it will certainly pervert the statements of the wicked. The Gemara asks: Are fools and the wicked suitable for judgment, i.e., to be appointed as judges? Rather, this is what the tanna of the baraita said: 鈥淔or a bribe blinds the eyes of the wise鈥; even if he were very wise but he took a bribe, he will not leave this world without suffering blindness of the heart, i.e., he will eventually turn foolish. 鈥淎nd perverts the words of the righteous鈥;

讗驻讬诇讜 爪讚讬拽 讙诪讜专 讜诇讜拽讞 砖讜讞讚 讗讬谞讜 谞驻讟专 诪谉 讛注讜诇诐 讘诇讗 讟讬专讜祝 讚注转

even if he is completely righteous but he took a bribe, he will not leave this world without becoming demented.

讻讬 讗转讗 专讘 讚讬诪讬 讗诪专 讚专砖 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讘专 讻讛谉 诪讗讬 讚讻转讬讘 诪诇讱 讘诪砖驻讟 讬注诪讬讚 讗专抓 讜讗讬砖 转专讜诪讜转 讬讛专住谞讛 讗诐 讚讜诪讛 讚讬讬谉 诇诪诇讱 砖讗讬谞讜 爪专讬讱 诇讻诇讜诐 讬注诪讬讚 讗专抓 讜讗诐 讚讜诪讛 诇讻讛谉 砖诪讞讝专 注诇 讛讙专谞讜转 讬讛专住谞讛

When Rav Dimi came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said that Rav Na岣an bar Kohen interpreted a verse homiletically as follows. What is the meaning of that which is written: 鈥淭he king by justice establishes the land, but he who exacts gifts [terumot] overthrows it鈥 (Proverbs 29:4)? If a judge is like a king, in that he does not need anything and is not dependent on anyone, he establishes the land, i.e., he can serve as a judge. But if he is like a priest, who seeks out his terumot from various granaries, as he is dependent on others, he overthrows the land.

讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 专讘 砖讬诇讗 讛讗讬 讚讬讬谞讗 讚砖讗讬诇 砖讗讬诇转讗 驻住讜诇 诇诪讬讚谉 讚讬谞讗 讜诇讗 讗诪专谉 讗诇讗 讚诇讬转 诇讬讛 诇讗讜砖讜诇讬 讗讘诇 讗讬转 诇讬讛 诇讗讜砖讜诇讬 诇讬转 诇谉 讘讛

Rabba bar Rav Sheila said: This judge who borrows items from others is disqualified from rendering judgment because it is as though he accepts a salary. And we said this only in a case where he does not have articles to lend out to others but is constantly borrowing without lending objects in turn. However, if he has items to lend out to others, we have no problem with it.

讗讬谞讬 讜讛讗 专讘讗 砖讗讬诇 砖讗讬诇转讗 诪讚讘讬 讘专 诪专讬讜谉 讗祝 注诇 讙讘 讚诇讗 砖讬讬诇讬 诪讬谞讬讛 讛转诐 诇讗讞砖讜讘讬谞讛讜 讛讜讗 讚讘注讬

The Gemara asks: Is that so? But Rava would borrow items from the house of bar Maryon even though they would not borrow from him. The Gemara answers: There, he wanted to cause them to be considered more important in the community. Rava was very wealthy and did not need to borrow for his own benefit. On the contrary, by borrowing from the house of bar Maryon he raised their standing in the community.

讗诪专 专讘讗 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讚砖讜讞讚讗 讻讬讜谉 讚拽讘讬诇 诇讬讛 砖讜讞讚讗 诪讬谞讬讛 讗讬拽专讘讗 诇讬讛 讚注转讬讛 诇讙讘讬讛 讜讛讜讬 讻讙讜驻讬讛 讜讗讬谉 讗讚诐 专讜讗讛 讞讜讘讛 诇注爪诪讜 诪讗讬 砖讜讞讚 砖讛讜讗 讞讚 讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 诇讗 诇讬讚讜谉 讗讬谞讬砖 讚讬谞讗 诇诪讗谉 讚专讞讬诐 诇讬讛 讜诇讗 诇诪讗谉 讚住谞讬 诇讬讛 讚专讞讬诐 诇讬讛 诇讗 讞讝讬 诇讬讛 讞讜讘讛 讚住谞讬 诇讬讛 诇讗 讞讝讬 诇讬讛 讝讻讜转讗

Rava said: What is the reason for the prohibition against taking a bribe? Once a judge accepts a bribe from one party, his thoughts draw closer to him and he becomes like his own self, and a person does not find fault in himself. The Gemara notes that the term itself alludes to this idea: What is the meaning of sho岣d, bribe? It can be read as: Shehu 岣d, as he is one, i.e., at one mind with the litigant. Rav Pappa said: A person should not judge a case involving one whom he loves, nor involving one whom he hates. He should not judge one whom he loves, as he will not find any fault in him, while with regard to one whom he hates, he will not find any merit in him.

讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讛讗讬 爪讜专讘讗 诪专讘谞谉 讚诪专讞诪讬谉 诇讬讛 讘谞讬 诪转讗 诇讗讜 诪砖讜诐 讚诪注诇讬 讟驻讬 讗诇讗 诪砖讜诐 讚诇讗 诪讜讻讞 诇讛讜 讘诪讬诇讬 讚砖诪讬讗

Abaye said: With regard to this Torah scholar who is beloved by the residents of his town, it is not because he is a superior Sage than others; rather, it is because he does not reprove them in Heavenly matters. He is beloved because he is not strict with them with regard to the observance of mitzvot.

讗诪专 专讘讗 诪专讬砖 讛讜讛 讗诪讬谞讗 讛谞讬 讘谞讬 诪讞讜讝讗 讻讜诇讛讜 专讞诪讜 诇讬 讻讬讜谉 讚讛讜讗讬 讚讬讬谞讗 讗诪讬谞讗 诪讬谞讬讬讛讜 住谞讜 诇讬 讜诪讬谞讬讬讛讜 专讞诪讜 诇讬 讻讬讜谉 讚讞讝讗讬 讚诪讗谉 讚诪讬讞讬讬讘 诇讬讛 讛讗讬讚谞讗 拽讗 讝讻讬 诇诪讞专 讗诪讬谞讗 讗诐 诪专讞诐 讻讜诇讛讜 专讞诪讜 诇讬 讗讬 诪住谞讜 讻讜诇讛讜 住谞讜 诇讬

Rava said: At first I would say that all these residents of Me岣za love me; however, once I became a judge I said that some of them hate me and some of them love me, as I assumed that their feelings toward me depended on the success of their case. When I saw that the one I declared guilty today would be found innocent the following day, I realized that my rulings do not determine their attitudes, and therefore I said: If they love, then they all love me, and if they hate, then they all hate me, regardless of what happens in the courtroom.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讜砖讜讞讚 诇讗 转拽讞 讗讬谞讜 爪专讬讱 诇讜诪专 砖讜讞讚 诪诪讜谉 讗诇讗 讗驻讬诇讜 砖讜讞讚 讚讘专讬诐 谞诪讬 讗住讜专 诪讚诇讗 讻转讬讘 讘爪注 诇讗 转拽讞 讛讬讻讬 讚诪讬 砖讜讞讚 讚讘专讬诐

The Sages taught: 鈥淎nd you shall take no bribe鈥 (Exodus 23:8). It is not necessary to say that this includes bribery by means of money; however, even verbal bribery, assisting by means of speech, is also prohibited. The halakha that a bribe is not necessarily monetary is derived from the fact that it is not written: And you shall take no profit. The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances of bribing with words?

讻讬 讛讗 讚砖诪讜讗诇 讛讜讛 注讘专 讘诪讘专讗 讗转讗 讛讛讜讗 讙讘专讗 讬讛讬讘 诇讬讛 讬讚讬讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪讗讬 注讘讬讚转讬讱 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讚讬谞讗 讗讬转 诇讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 驻住讬诇谞讗 诇讱 诇讚讬谞讗

The Gemara explains: This can be demonstrated by that episode involving Shmuel, who was once crossing a river on a narrow ferry. A certain man came along and gave him a hand to help him out of the ferryboat. Shmuel said to him: What are you doing in this place? The man said to him: I have a case to present before you for judgment. Shmuel said to him: I am disqualified from presiding over your case, as you did me a favor. Although no money changed hands, a bond was formed between the pair.

讗诪讬诪专 讛讜讛 讬转讬讘 讜拽讗 讚讗讬谉 讚讬谞讗 驻专讞 讙讚驻讗 讗专讬砖讬讛 讗转讗 讛讛讜讗 讙讘专讗 砖拽诇讬讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪讗讬 注讘讬讚转讬讱 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讚讬谞讗 讗讬转 诇讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 驻住讬诇谞讗 诇讱 诇讚讬谞讗 诪专 注讜拽讘讗 讛讜讛 砖讚讬 专讜拽讗 拽诪讬讛 讗转讗 讛讛讜讗 讙讘专讗 讻住讬讬讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪讗讬 注讘讬讚转讬讱 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讚讬谞讗 讗讬转 诇讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 驻住讬诇谞讗 诇讱 诇讚讬谞讗

The Gemara relates a similar story. Ameimar was sitting and judging a case when a feather floated and landed on his head. A certain man came by and removed it from his head. Ameimar said to him: What are you doing here? He said to him: I have a case to present before you. Ameimar said to him: I am disqualified from presiding over your case, due to the favor you performed for me. The Gemara likewise relates: There was spittle lying before Mar Ukva. A certain man came by and covered it. He said to him: What are you doing here? He said to him: I have a case to present before you. Mar Ukva said to him: I am disqualified from presiding over your case.

专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 讘专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讛讜讛 专讙讬诇 讗专讬住讬讛 讚讛讜讛 诪讬讬转讬 诇讬讛 讻诇 诪注诇讬 砖讘转讗 讻谞转讗 讚驻讬专讬 讬讜诪讗 讞讚 讗讬讬转讬 诇讬讛 讘讞诪砖讛 讘砖讘转讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪讗讬 砖谞讗 讛讗讬讚谞讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讚讬谞讗 讗讬转 诇讬 讜讗诪讬谞讗 讗讙讘 讗讜专讞讬 讗讬讬转讬 诇讬讛 诇诪专 诇讗 拽讘讬诇 诪讬谞讬讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 驻住讬诇谞讗 诇讱 诇讚讬谞讗

The Gemara cites another incident. The sharecropper of Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, was accustomed to bringing him a basket [kanta] full of fruits every Shabbat eve. One day, he brought him the basket on a Thursday. Rabbi Yishmael said to him: What is different that you came early now, this week? The sharecropper said to him: I have a case to present before you, and I said to myself that along my way I will bring to the Master the basket of fruits, as in any case I am coming on Thursday, the day the courts are in session. Rabbi Yishmael did not accept the basket of fruits from him, and he said to him: I am disqualified from presiding over your case.

讗讜转讬讘 讝讜讝讗 讚专讘谞谉 讜拽讚讬讬谞讬谉 诇讬讛 讘讛讚讬 讚拽讗讝讬诇 讜讗转讬 讗诪专 讗讬 讘注讬 讟注讬谉 讛讻讬 讜讗讬 讘注讬 讟注讬谉 讛讻讬 讗诪专 转讬驻讞 谞驻砖诐 砖诇 诪拽讘诇讬 砖讜讞讚 讜诪讛 讗谞讬 砖诇讗 谞讟诇转讬 讜讗诐 谞讟诇转讬 砖诇讬 谞讟诇转讬 讻讱 诪拽讘诇讬 砖讜讞讚 注诇 讗讞转 讻诪讛 讜讻诪讛

Rabbi Yishmael seated a pair of rabbinic scholars and they judged the sharecropper鈥檚 case. As Rabbi Yishmael was coming and going, he said to himself: If he wants, he could claim this, and if he wants, he could claim that, i.e., he kept thinking of all the ways in which the litigant who brought him the fruits could win his case. He said to himself: Blast the souls of those who accept bribes. If I, who did not accept anything, and if I had accepted, I would have accepted my own property, as it is my sharecropper and the fruits legally belong to me, am nevertheless in this state of mind due to the proposed gift, all the more so are those who actually accept bribes inevitably biased in favor of the one who bribed them.

专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 讘专 讗诇讬砖注 讗讬讬转讬 诇讬讛 讛讛讜讗 讙讘专讗 专讗砖讬转 讛讙讝 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪讛讬讻讗 讗转 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪讚讜讱 驻诇谉 讜诪讛转诐 诇讛讻讗 诇讗 讛讜讛 讻讛谉 诇诪讬转讘讗 诇讬讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讚讬谞讗 讗讬转 诇讬 讜讗诪讬谞讗 讗讙讘 讗讜专讞讗讬 讗讬讬转讬 诇讬讛 诇诪专 讗诪专 诇讬讛 驻住讬诇谞讗 诇讱 诇讚讬谞讗 诇讗 拽讘讬诇 诪讬谞讬讛

The Gemara likewise relates with regard to Rabbi Yishmael bar Elisha, who was a priest, that a certain man once brought him the first shearing. Rabbi Yishmael said to him: From where are you? The man said to him: I am from such and such a place. Rabbi Yishmael said to him: And from there to here was there no priest to whom you could give the first shearing? He said to him: I have a case to present before you, and I said to myself that along my way I will bring to the Master the first shearing. Rabbi Yishmael said to him: I am disqualified from presiding over your case, and he would not accept the first shearing from him.

讗讜转讬讘 诇讬讛 讝讜讙讗 讚专讘谞谉 讜拽讚讬讬谞讬 诇讬讛 讘讛讚讬 讚拽讗讝讬诇 讜讗转讬 讗诪专 讗讬 讘注讬 讟注讬谉 讛讻讬 讜讗讬 讘注讬 讟注讬谉 讛讻讬 讗诪专 转讬驻讞 谞驻砖诐 砖诇 诪拽讘诇讬 砖讜讞讚 讜诪讛 讗谞讬 砖诇讗 谞讟诇转讬 讜讗诐 谞讟诇转讬 砖诇讬 谞讟诇转讬 讻讱 诪拽讘诇讬 砖讜讞讚 注诇 讗讞转 讻诪讛 讜讻诪讛

Rabbi Yishmael bar Elisha seated a pair of rabbinic scholars and they judged his case. As Rabbi Yishmael was coming and going, he said to himself: If he wants, he could claim this, and if he wants, he could claim that. He said to himself: Blast the souls of those who accept bribes. If I, who did not accept anything, and if I had accepted, I would have accepted my own property, as I am a priest and am entitled to receive the first shearing, am nevertheless in this state of mind, all the more so are those who accept bribes.

专讘 注谞谉 讗讬讬转讬 诇讬讛 讛讛讜讗 讙讘专讗 讻谞转讗 讚讙讬诇讚谞讬 讚讘讬 讙讬诇讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪讗讬 注讘讬讚转讬讱 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讚讬谞讗 讗讬转 诇讬 诇讗 拽讘讬诇 诪讬谞讬讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 驻住讬诇谞讗 诇讱 诇讚讬谞讗

The Gemara relates: There was a certain man who once brought to Rav Anan a basket of small fish [gildanei devei gilei]. He said to him: What are you doing here? The man said to him: I have a case to present before you. Rav Anan would not accept the basket from him, and he said to him: I am disqualified from presiding over your case, due to your actions.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 讚讬谞讗 讚诪专 诇讗 讘注讬谞讗 拽讘讜诇讬 诇拽讘讬诇 诪专 讚诇讗 诇诪谞注谉 诪专 诪讗拽专讜讘讬 讘讻讜专讬诐 讚转谞讬讗 讜讗讬砖 讘讗 诪讘注诇 砖诇讬砖讛 讜讬讘讗 诇讗讬砖 讛讗诇讛讬诐 诇讞诐 讘讻讜专讬诐 注砖专讬诐 诇讞诐 砖注讜专讬诐 讜讻专诪诇 讘爪拽诇讜谞讜 讜讻讬 讗诇讬砖注 讗讜讻诇 讘讻讜专讬诐 讛讜讛 讗诇讗 诇讜诪专 诇讱 讻诇 讛诪讘讬讗 讚讜专讜谉 诇转诇诪讬讚 讞讻诐 讻讗讬诇讜 诪拽专讬讘 讘讻讜专讬诐

The man said to him: I do not need the Master鈥檚 judgment. However, let the Master accept my gift anyway, so that the Master does not prevent me from presenting first fruits. What does the mitzva of first fruits have to with this situation? As it is taught in a baraita: 鈥淎nd there came a man came from Ba鈥檃l Shalisha, and he brought the man of God bread of the first fruits, twenty loaves of barley and fresh ears of corn in his sack鈥 (II聽Kings 4:42). But did Elisha, the recipient of these gifts, eat first fruits? After all, he was not a priest. Rather, this verse comes to tell you: Whoever brings a gift to a Torah scholar, it is as though he has presented first fruits. This visitor to Rav Anan wished to fulfill this mitzva.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 拽讘讜诇讬 诇讗 讘注讬谞谉 讚讗讬拽讘讬诇 讛砖转讗 讚讗诪专转 诇讬 讟注诪讗 诪拽讘讬诇谞讗 砖讚专讬讛 诇拽诪讬讛 讚专讘 谞讞诪谉 砖诇讞 诇讬讛 谞讬讚讬讬谞讬讛 诪专 诇讛讗讬 讙讘专讗 讚讗谞讗 注谞谉 驻住讬诇谞讗 诇讬讛 诇讚讬谞讗 讗诪专 诪讚砖诇讞 诇讬 讛讻讬 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 拽专讬讘讬讛 讛讜讗 讛讜讛 拽讗讬诐 讚讬谞讗 讚讬转诪讬 拽诪讬讛 讗诪专

Rav Anan said to him: I do not want to take it from you, but now that you have explained to me the reason that you wish to give it to me I will accept it from you. Rav Anan sent the man to Rav Na岣an, and he also sent him a letter: Let the Master judge this man鈥檚 case because I, Anan, am disqualified from judging his cases. Rav Na岣an said to himself: From the fact that he sent me this letter, I can conclude from here that the reason he is disqualified from judging the case is because he is his relative. At that time, a case involving orphans was being heard before Rav Na岣an. He said:

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Ron and Shira Krebs to commemorate the 73rd yahrzeit of Shira's grandfather (Yitzchak Leib Ben David Ber HaCohen v'Malka), the 1st yahrzeit of Shira's father (Gershon Pinya Ben Yitzchak Leib HaCohen v'Menucha Sara), and the bar mitzvah of their son Eytan who will be making a siyum on Mishna Shas this month.

  • This month's learning is sponsored for the refuah shleima of Naama bat Yael Esther.

  • Masechet Ketubot is sponsored by Erica and Rob Schwartz in honor of the 50th wedding anniversary of Erica's parents Sheira and Steve Schacter.

Want to explore more about the Daf?

See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners

learn daf yomi one week at a time with tamara spitz

Ketubot: 99-106 – Daf Yomi One Week at a Time

This week we will learn what happens when a court makes a mistake on the valuation of property. We will...
talking talmud_square

Ketubot 105: Judges in Jerusalem

A new mishnah, starting the final chapter of Ketubot, 13, with mishnayot organized according to the statements of specific ancient...

Ketubot 105

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Ketubot 105

转砖讘注 讘住讜祝 讜诇讗 转砖讘注 讘转讞诇讛 谞讞诇拽讜 注诇讬讜 讘谞讬 讻讛谞讬诐 讙讚讜诇讬诐 讜讗诪专讜 转砖讘注 讘转讞诇讛 讜讘住讜祝 讗诪专 专讘讬 讚讜住讗 讘谉 讛专讻讬谞住 讻讚讘专讬讛诐 讗诪专 专讘谉 讬讜讞谞谉 讘谉 讝讻讗讬 讬驻讛 讗诪专 讞谞谉 诇讗 转砖讘注 讗诇讗 讘住讜祝

She takes an oath at the end of their marriage, i.e., when she learns that her husband died. The oath is to the effect that he did not leave her any funds when he departed overseas, as she is claiming full payment of her marriage contract. And she does not take an oath at the outset of his trip overseas, when she demands support soon after his departure. The sons of High Priests disagreed with 岣nan鈥檚 opinion and said: She takes an oath both at the outset and at the end. Rabbi Dosa ben Harkinas said: The halakha is in accordance with their statement, i.e., that of the sons of the High Priests. Rabban Yo岣nan ben Zakkai said that 岣nan spoke well: She takes an oath only at the end.

讙诪壮 讜专诪讬谞讛讬 砖诇砖讛 讚讬讬谞讬 讙讝讬诇讜转 讛讬讜 讘讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讗讚诪讜谉 讘谉 讙讚讗讬 讜讞谞谉 讛诪爪专讬 讜讞谞谉 讘谉 讗讘讬砖诇讜诐 拽砖讬讗 转诇转 讗转专讬谉 拽砖讬讗 讙讝讬专讜转 讗讙讝讬诇讜转

GEMARA: The mishna states that there were two judges who issued decrees [gezeirot] in Jerusalem. And the Gemara raises a contradiction from the following baraita: There were three judges who adjudicated cases of theft [gezeilot] in Jerusalem: Admon ben Gaddai, 岣nan the Egyptian, and 岣nan ben Avishalom. The fact that the baraita mentions three judges is difficult, as the mishna includes only two; and the fact that the judges are described in the mishna as those who issue decrees is also difficult as they are described in the baraita as judges who adjudicate cases of theft.

讘砖诇诪讗 转诇转 讗转专讬谉 诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讚讞砖讬讘 诇讬讛 拽转谞讬 讚诇讗 讞砖讬讘 诇讬讛 诇讗 拽转谞讬 讗诇讗 讙讝讬专讜转 讗讙讝讬诇讜转 拽砖讬讗

The Gemara continues: Granted, the contradiction between the statement that there were three judges and the statement that there were two is not difficult, as those who are important to him the tanna teaches in the mishna, and those who are not important to him the tanna does not teach in the mishna. Although there were other judges, the tanna mentioned only those pertinent to the topic at hand. However, the contradiction between the ruling that refers to decrees and the ruling that refers to theft is difficult.

讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讘专 讬爪讞拽 砖讛讬讜 讙讜讝专讬谉 讙讝讬专讜转 注诇 讙讝讬诇讜转 讻讚转谞讬讗 拽讬讟诪讛 谞讟讬注讛 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗讜诪专 讙讜讝专讬 讙讝讬专讜转 砖讘讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 谞讟讬注讛 讘转 砖谞转讛 砖转讬 讻住祝 讘转 砖转讬 砖谞讬诐 讗专讘注 讻住祝

Rav Na岣an bar Yitz岣k said: There is no contradiction, as they would issue decrees concerning matters of theft, as it is taught in a baraita: With regard to an animal that severed a young plant in the field of another, Rabbi Yosei says that those who issue decrees in Jerusalem said: For a plant one year old, the animal鈥檚 owner must pay two silver pieces; for a plant two years old, he pays four silver pieces.

讜专诪讬谞讛讬 砖诇砖讛 讚讬讬谞讬 讙讝讬专讜转 讛讬讜 讘讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讗讚诪讜谉 讜讞谞谉 讜谞讞讜诐 讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 诪讗谉 转谞讗 谞讞讜诐 专讘讬 谞转谉 讛讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 专讘讬 谞转谉 讗讜诪专 讗祝 谞讞讜诐 讛诪讚讬 诪讙讜讝专讬 讙讝讬专讜转 砖讘讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讛讬讛 讜诇讗 讛讜讚讜 诇讜 讞讻诪讬诐

The Gemara raises a contradiction between the baraita cited above and another baraita: There were three prominent judges who issued decrees in Jerusalem: Admon, 岣nan, and Na岣m. In the previous baraita, Na岣m was not listed. Rav Pappa said: Who is the tanna who taught that the third judge was Na岣m? It is Rabbi Natan, as it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Natan says: Na岣m HaMadi was also among those who would issue decrees in Jerusalem, but the Sages did not agree with his opinion.

讜转讜 诇讬讻讗 讜讛讗诪专 专讘讬 驻谞讞住 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讜砖注讬讗 砖诇砖 诪讗讜转 讜转砖注讬诐 讜讗专讘注讛 讘转讬 讚讬谞讬谉 讛讬讜 讘讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讻谞讙讚谉 讘转讬 讻谞住讬讜转 讜讻谞讙讚谉 讘转讬 诪讚专砖讜转 讜讻谞讙讚谉 讘转讬 住讜驻专讬诐 讚讬讬谞讬谉 讟讜讘讗 讛讜讜 讜讻讬 拽讗诪专讬谞谉 讗讙讜讝专讬 讙讝讬专讜转 拽讗诪专讬谞谉

The Gemara asks: And were there no more judges? Didn鈥檛 Rabbi Pine岣s say that Rabbi Oshaya said: There were 394 courts in Jerusalem, and a comparable number of synagogues, and a comparable number of study halls, and a comparable number of houses of teachers of schoolchildren. The Gemara answers: There were many judges, but when we say that there were a small number, it is specifically concerning those who issue decrees that we say so.

讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 讗住讬 讙讜讝专讬 讙讝讬专讜转 砖讘讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讛讬讜 谞讜讟诇讬谉 砖讻专谉 转砖注讬诐 讜转砖注 诪谞讛 诪转专讜诪转 讛诇砖讻讛 诇讗 专爪讜 诪讜住讬驻讬谉 诇讛诐 诇讗 专爪讜 讗讟讜 讘专砖讬注讬 注住拽讬谞谉 讗诇讗 诇讗 住驻拽讜 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖诇讗 专爪讜 诪讜住讬驻讬谉 注诇讬讛谉

Rav Yehuda said that Rav Asi said: Those who issue decrees in Jerusalem would take their wages, ninety-nine maneh, equal to 9,900 dinars per year, from the collection of the Temple treasury chamber. If they did not wish to do so, one adds to their wages. The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of the phrase: If they did not wish to do so? Does this mean that if they desired higher wages, they were paid more? Is that to say that we are dealing with wicked people who demand wages beyond what they need? Rather, on the contrary, Rav Asi said that if their wages were insufficient for their needs, then even if they did not wish to receive higher wages, one adds to their wages so that they may devote themselves to their communal service.

拽专谞讗 讛讜讛 砖拽讬诇 讗讬住转讬专讗 诪讝讻讗讬 讜讗讬住转讬专讗 诪讞讬讬讘 讜讚讗讬谉 诇讛讜 讚讬谞讗 讜讛讬讻讬 注讘讬讚 讛讻讬 讜讛讻转讬讘 讜砖讜讞讚 诇讗 转拽讞

The Gemara relates: The Sage Karna would take an istera, a small coin, from the innocent party, and an istera from the guilty party, i.e., he would charge both parties that came to him for judgment, and then he would judge their case. The Gemara asks: But how could he do so? Isn鈥檛 it written: 鈥淎nd you shall take no bribe鈥 (Exodus 23:8), which indicates that a judge may not take money from either of the two litigants?

讜讻讬 转讬诪讗 讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讛讬讻讗 讚诇讗 砖拽讬诇 诪转专讜讬讬讛讜 讚诇诪讗 讗转讬 诇讗爪诇讜讬讬 讚讬谞讗 拽专谞讗 讻讬讜谉 讚砖拽讬诇 诪转专讜讬讬讛讜 诇讗 讗转讬 诇讗爪诇讜讬讬 讚讬谞讗 讜讻讬 诇讗 讗转讬 诇讗爪诇讜讬讬 讚讬谞讗 诪讬 砖专讬

And if you say that this prohibition against taking a bribe applies only when a judge does not take from both parties, as there is a concern that perhaps he may come to pervert the judgment in favor of the party that gave him the bribe, whereas in the case of Karna, since he took from both parties he will not come to pervert the judgment, who says that the verse is referring only to those circumstances? Is it permitted to take a bribe even in a case when one will not pervert the judgment?

讜讛转谞讬讗 讜砖讜讞讚 诇讗 转拽讞 诪讛 转诇诪讜讚 诇讜诪专 讗诐 诇诇诪讚 砖诇讗 诇讝讻讜转 讗转 讛讞讬讬讘 讜砖诇讗 诇讞讬讬讘 讗转 讛讝讻讗讬 讛专讬 讻讘专 谞讗诪专 诇讗 转讟讛 诪砖驻讟 讗诇讗 讗驻讬诇讜 诇讝讻讜转 讗转 讛讝讻讗讬 讜诇讞讬讬讘 讗转 讛讞讬讬讘 讗诪专讛 转讜专讛 讜砖讜讞讚 诇讗 转拽讞

But isn鈥檛 it taught in a baraita: 鈥淎nd you shall take no bribe鈥 (Exodus 23:8); what is the meaning when the verse states this? If it comes to teach that one should not acquit the guilty and one should not convict the innocent due to a bribe, it is already stated: 鈥淵ou shall not wrest judgment鈥 (Deuteronomy 16:19). Rather, this verse teaches that even if the purpose of the bribe is to ensure that one acquit the innocent and convict the guilty, the Torah nevertheless says: 鈥淎nd you shall take no bribe.鈥 This indicates that it is prohibited for a judge to receive anything from the litigants, even if there is no concern at all that justice will be perverted.

讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讛讬讻讗 讚砖拽讬诇 讘转讜专转 砖讜讞讚 拽专谞讗 讘转讜专转 讗讙专讗 讛讜讛 砖拽讬诇 讜讘转讜专转 讗讙专讗 诪讬 砖专讬 讜讛转谞谉 讛谞讜讟诇 砖讻专 诇讚讜谉 讚讬谞讬讜 讘讟诇讬谉 讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讗讙专 讚讬谞讗 拽专谞讗 讗讙专 讘讟讬诇讗 讛讜讛 砖拽讬诇

The Gemara answers: This applies only when one takes the money in the form of a bribe, even if he does not intend to pervert the judgment, whereas Karna took the money in the form of a salary, not a bribe. The Gemara asks: But is it permitted to take money from litigants in the form of a salary? Didn鈥檛 we learn in a mishna (Kiddushin 58b): With regard to one who takes a salary to judge cases, his judgments are void? The Gemara answers: This applies only when he took money as his compensation for judging the case, whereas Karna accepted the money as compensation for unemployment, i.e., as he could not engage in his usual work while dealing with the case, he would take compensation for this unemployment.

讜讗讙专 讘讟讬诇讗 诪讬 砖专讬 讜讛转谞讬讗 诪讻讜注专 讛讚讬讬谉 砖谞讜讟诇 砖讻专 诇讚讜谉 讗诇讗 砖讚讬谞讜 讚讬谉 讛讬讻讬 讚诪讬 讗讬诇讬诪讗 讗讙专 讚讬谞讗 讚讬谞讜 讚讬谉 讜讛转谞讬讗 讛谞讜讟诇 砖讻专 诇讚讜谉 讚讬谞讬讜 讘讟讬诇讬谉 讗诇讗 讗讙专 讘讟讬诇讗 讜拽转谞讬 诪讻讜注专 讛讚讬讬谉

The Gemara asks: And is it permitted to take money as compensation for unemployment? Isn鈥檛 it taught in a baraita: Ugly is the judge who takes a salary to judge cases; however, his judgments are valid judgments? The Gemara clarifies: What are the circumstances of this baraita? If we say that it is referring to one who accepted money as his compensation for judging, are his judgments valid judgments? But didn鈥檛 we learn in a mishna (Kiddushin 58b): With regard to one who takes a salary to judge cases, his judgments are void? Rather, it must certainly be referring to a situation where he takes money as compensation for unemployment, and yet the baraita teaches: Ugly is the judge.

讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讘讟讬诇讗 讚诇讗 诪讜讻讞讗 拽专谞讗 讘讟讬诇讗 讚诪讜讻讞讗 讛讜讛 砖拽讬诇 讚讛讜讛 转讛讬 讘讗诪讘专讗 讚讞诪专讗 讜讬讛讘讬 诇讬讛 讝讜讝讗

The Gemara answers: This statement that the judge is ugly applies only when the fact that he is taking a salary for his unemployment is not evident, as he was not engaged in some other type of work at the time. Karna, however, would take money for his unemployment when it was evident that he was taking time off work to judge the case, as he was examining people’s wine stores [ambara] to see which casks would last and which were going sour, and they would pay him one dinar as a salary. Consequently, when Karna paused from his work to deal with a case, it was clear that he was losing money.

讻讬 讛讗 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗 讻讬 讛讜讛 讗转讬 讚讬谞讗 诇拽诪讬讛 讗诪专 诇讛讜 讛讘讜 诇讬 讙讘专讗 讚讚诇讬 诇讬 讘讞专讬拽讗讬 讜讗讬讚讜谉 诇讻讜 讚讬谞讗

This resembles an incident involving Rav Huna. When people would come for judgment before him, he would say to them: As I am unable to take time off from my work, give me a man who can draw water for me, to irrigate the fields in my place, and I will judge your case.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讛讜 讘讗 讜专讗讛 讻诪讛 住诪讜讬讜转 注讬谞讬讛谉 砖诇 诪拽讘诇讬 砖讜讞讚 讗讚诐 讞砖 讘注讬谞讬讜 谞讜转谉 诪诪讜谉 诇专讜驻讗 住驻拽 诪转专驻讗 住驻拽 讗讬谞讜 诪转专驻讗 讜讛谉 谞讜讟诇讬谉 砖讜讛 驻专讜讟讛 讜诪住诪讬谉 注讬谞讬讛谉 砖谞讗诪专 讻讬 讛砖讜讞讚 讬注讜专 驻拽讞讬诐

Rabbi Abbahu said: Come and see how blind are the eyes of those who accept bribes, and how they ruin themselves. If a person has pain in his eyes, he gives a doctor money, and even then it is uncertain whether he will be healed or whether he will not be healed. And yet those judges take the value of a peruta, a small amount of money as a bribe, and actively blind their eyes, as it is stated: 鈥淔or a bribe blinds those who have sight鈥 (Exodus 23:8).

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讻讬 讛砖讜讞讚 讬注讜专 注讬谞讬 讞讻诪讬诐 拽诇 讜讞讜诪专 诇讟驻砖讬谉 讜讬住诇祝 讚讘专讬 爪讚讬拽讬诐 拽诇 讜讞讜诪专 诇专砖注讬诐 诪讬讚讬 讟驻砖讬诐 讜专砖注讬诐 讘谞讬 讚讬谞讗 谞讬谞讛讜 讗诇讗 讛讻讬 拽讗诪专 讻讬 讛砖讜讞讚 讬注讜专 注讬谞讬 讞讻诪讬诐 讗驻讬诇讜 讞讻诐 讙讚讜诇 讜诇讜拽讞 砖讜讞讚 讗讬谞讜 谞驻讟专 诪谉 讛注讜诇诐 讘诇讗 住诪讬讜转 讛诇讘 讜讬住诇祝 讚讘专讬 爪讚讬拽讬诐

The Sages taught: 鈥淔or a bribe blinds the eyes of the wise鈥 (Deuteronomy 16:19); a fortiori it will certainly blind the eyes of fools. 鈥淎nd perverts the words of the righteous鈥 (Deuteronomy 16:19); a fortiori it will certainly pervert the statements of the wicked. The Gemara asks: Are fools and the wicked suitable for judgment, i.e., to be appointed as judges? Rather, this is what the tanna of the baraita said: 鈥淔or a bribe blinds the eyes of the wise鈥; even if he were very wise but he took a bribe, he will not leave this world without suffering blindness of the heart, i.e., he will eventually turn foolish. 鈥淎nd perverts the words of the righteous鈥;

讗驻讬诇讜 爪讚讬拽 讙诪讜专 讜诇讜拽讞 砖讜讞讚 讗讬谞讜 谞驻讟专 诪谉 讛注讜诇诐 讘诇讗 讟讬专讜祝 讚注转

even if he is completely righteous but he took a bribe, he will not leave this world without becoming demented.

讻讬 讗转讗 专讘 讚讬诪讬 讗诪专 讚专砖 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讘专 讻讛谉 诪讗讬 讚讻转讬讘 诪诇讱 讘诪砖驻讟 讬注诪讬讚 讗专抓 讜讗讬砖 转专讜诪讜转 讬讛专住谞讛 讗诐 讚讜诪讛 讚讬讬谉 诇诪诇讱 砖讗讬谞讜 爪专讬讱 诇讻诇讜诐 讬注诪讬讚 讗专抓 讜讗诐 讚讜诪讛 诇讻讛谉 砖诪讞讝专 注诇 讛讙专谞讜转 讬讛专住谞讛

When Rav Dimi came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said that Rav Na岣an bar Kohen interpreted a verse homiletically as follows. What is the meaning of that which is written: 鈥淭he king by justice establishes the land, but he who exacts gifts [terumot] overthrows it鈥 (Proverbs 29:4)? If a judge is like a king, in that he does not need anything and is not dependent on anyone, he establishes the land, i.e., he can serve as a judge. But if he is like a priest, who seeks out his terumot from various granaries, as he is dependent on others, he overthrows the land.

讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 专讘 砖讬诇讗 讛讗讬 讚讬讬谞讗 讚砖讗讬诇 砖讗讬诇转讗 驻住讜诇 诇诪讬讚谉 讚讬谞讗 讜诇讗 讗诪专谉 讗诇讗 讚诇讬转 诇讬讛 诇讗讜砖讜诇讬 讗讘诇 讗讬转 诇讬讛 诇讗讜砖讜诇讬 诇讬转 诇谉 讘讛

Rabba bar Rav Sheila said: This judge who borrows items from others is disqualified from rendering judgment because it is as though he accepts a salary. And we said this only in a case where he does not have articles to lend out to others but is constantly borrowing without lending objects in turn. However, if he has items to lend out to others, we have no problem with it.

讗讬谞讬 讜讛讗 专讘讗 砖讗讬诇 砖讗讬诇转讗 诪讚讘讬 讘专 诪专讬讜谉 讗祝 注诇 讙讘 讚诇讗 砖讬讬诇讬 诪讬谞讬讛 讛转诐 诇讗讞砖讜讘讬谞讛讜 讛讜讗 讚讘注讬

The Gemara asks: Is that so? But Rava would borrow items from the house of bar Maryon even though they would not borrow from him. The Gemara answers: There, he wanted to cause them to be considered more important in the community. Rava was very wealthy and did not need to borrow for his own benefit. On the contrary, by borrowing from the house of bar Maryon he raised their standing in the community.

讗诪专 专讘讗 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讚砖讜讞讚讗 讻讬讜谉 讚拽讘讬诇 诇讬讛 砖讜讞讚讗 诪讬谞讬讛 讗讬拽专讘讗 诇讬讛 讚注转讬讛 诇讙讘讬讛 讜讛讜讬 讻讙讜驻讬讛 讜讗讬谉 讗讚诐 专讜讗讛 讞讜讘讛 诇注爪诪讜 诪讗讬 砖讜讞讚 砖讛讜讗 讞讚 讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 诇讗 诇讬讚讜谉 讗讬谞讬砖 讚讬谞讗 诇诪讗谉 讚专讞讬诐 诇讬讛 讜诇讗 诇诪讗谉 讚住谞讬 诇讬讛 讚专讞讬诐 诇讬讛 诇讗 讞讝讬 诇讬讛 讞讜讘讛 讚住谞讬 诇讬讛 诇讗 讞讝讬 诇讬讛 讝讻讜转讗

Rava said: What is the reason for the prohibition against taking a bribe? Once a judge accepts a bribe from one party, his thoughts draw closer to him and he becomes like his own self, and a person does not find fault in himself. The Gemara notes that the term itself alludes to this idea: What is the meaning of sho岣d, bribe? It can be read as: Shehu 岣d, as he is one, i.e., at one mind with the litigant. Rav Pappa said: A person should not judge a case involving one whom he loves, nor involving one whom he hates. He should not judge one whom he loves, as he will not find any fault in him, while with regard to one whom he hates, he will not find any merit in him.

讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讛讗讬 爪讜专讘讗 诪专讘谞谉 讚诪专讞诪讬谉 诇讬讛 讘谞讬 诪转讗 诇讗讜 诪砖讜诐 讚诪注诇讬 讟驻讬 讗诇讗 诪砖讜诐 讚诇讗 诪讜讻讞 诇讛讜 讘诪讬诇讬 讚砖诪讬讗

Abaye said: With regard to this Torah scholar who is beloved by the residents of his town, it is not because he is a superior Sage than others; rather, it is because he does not reprove them in Heavenly matters. He is beloved because he is not strict with them with regard to the observance of mitzvot.

讗诪专 专讘讗 诪专讬砖 讛讜讛 讗诪讬谞讗 讛谞讬 讘谞讬 诪讞讜讝讗 讻讜诇讛讜 专讞诪讜 诇讬 讻讬讜谉 讚讛讜讗讬 讚讬讬谞讗 讗诪讬谞讗 诪讬谞讬讬讛讜 住谞讜 诇讬 讜诪讬谞讬讬讛讜 专讞诪讜 诇讬 讻讬讜谉 讚讞讝讗讬 讚诪讗谉 讚诪讬讞讬讬讘 诇讬讛 讛讗讬讚谞讗 拽讗 讝讻讬 诇诪讞专 讗诪讬谞讗 讗诐 诪专讞诐 讻讜诇讛讜 专讞诪讜 诇讬 讗讬 诪住谞讜 讻讜诇讛讜 住谞讜 诇讬

Rava said: At first I would say that all these residents of Me岣za love me; however, once I became a judge I said that some of them hate me and some of them love me, as I assumed that their feelings toward me depended on the success of their case. When I saw that the one I declared guilty today would be found innocent the following day, I realized that my rulings do not determine their attitudes, and therefore I said: If they love, then they all love me, and if they hate, then they all hate me, regardless of what happens in the courtroom.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讜砖讜讞讚 诇讗 转拽讞 讗讬谞讜 爪专讬讱 诇讜诪专 砖讜讞讚 诪诪讜谉 讗诇讗 讗驻讬诇讜 砖讜讞讚 讚讘专讬诐 谞诪讬 讗住讜专 诪讚诇讗 讻转讬讘 讘爪注 诇讗 转拽讞 讛讬讻讬 讚诪讬 砖讜讞讚 讚讘专讬诐

The Sages taught: 鈥淎nd you shall take no bribe鈥 (Exodus 23:8). It is not necessary to say that this includes bribery by means of money; however, even verbal bribery, assisting by means of speech, is also prohibited. The halakha that a bribe is not necessarily monetary is derived from the fact that it is not written: And you shall take no profit. The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances of bribing with words?

讻讬 讛讗 讚砖诪讜讗诇 讛讜讛 注讘专 讘诪讘专讗 讗转讗 讛讛讜讗 讙讘专讗 讬讛讬讘 诇讬讛 讬讚讬讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪讗讬 注讘讬讚转讬讱 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讚讬谞讗 讗讬转 诇讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 驻住讬诇谞讗 诇讱 诇讚讬谞讗

The Gemara explains: This can be demonstrated by that episode involving Shmuel, who was once crossing a river on a narrow ferry. A certain man came along and gave him a hand to help him out of the ferryboat. Shmuel said to him: What are you doing in this place? The man said to him: I have a case to present before you for judgment. Shmuel said to him: I am disqualified from presiding over your case, as you did me a favor. Although no money changed hands, a bond was formed between the pair.

讗诪讬诪专 讛讜讛 讬转讬讘 讜拽讗 讚讗讬谉 讚讬谞讗 驻专讞 讙讚驻讗 讗专讬砖讬讛 讗转讗 讛讛讜讗 讙讘专讗 砖拽诇讬讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪讗讬 注讘讬讚转讬讱 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讚讬谞讗 讗讬转 诇讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 驻住讬诇谞讗 诇讱 诇讚讬谞讗 诪专 注讜拽讘讗 讛讜讛 砖讚讬 专讜拽讗 拽诪讬讛 讗转讗 讛讛讜讗 讙讘专讗 讻住讬讬讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪讗讬 注讘讬讚转讬讱 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讚讬谞讗 讗讬转 诇讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 驻住讬诇谞讗 诇讱 诇讚讬谞讗

The Gemara relates a similar story. Ameimar was sitting and judging a case when a feather floated and landed on his head. A certain man came by and removed it from his head. Ameimar said to him: What are you doing here? He said to him: I have a case to present before you. Ameimar said to him: I am disqualified from presiding over your case, due to the favor you performed for me. The Gemara likewise relates: There was spittle lying before Mar Ukva. A certain man came by and covered it. He said to him: What are you doing here? He said to him: I have a case to present before you. Mar Ukva said to him: I am disqualified from presiding over your case.

专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 讘专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讛讜讛 专讙讬诇 讗专讬住讬讛 讚讛讜讛 诪讬讬转讬 诇讬讛 讻诇 诪注诇讬 砖讘转讗 讻谞转讗 讚驻讬专讬 讬讜诪讗 讞讚 讗讬讬转讬 诇讬讛 讘讞诪砖讛 讘砖讘转讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪讗讬 砖谞讗 讛讗讬讚谞讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讚讬谞讗 讗讬转 诇讬 讜讗诪讬谞讗 讗讙讘 讗讜专讞讬 讗讬讬转讬 诇讬讛 诇诪专 诇讗 拽讘讬诇 诪讬谞讬讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 驻住讬诇谞讗 诇讱 诇讚讬谞讗

The Gemara cites another incident. The sharecropper of Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, was accustomed to bringing him a basket [kanta] full of fruits every Shabbat eve. One day, he brought him the basket on a Thursday. Rabbi Yishmael said to him: What is different that you came early now, this week? The sharecropper said to him: I have a case to present before you, and I said to myself that along my way I will bring to the Master the basket of fruits, as in any case I am coming on Thursday, the day the courts are in session. Rabbi Yishmael did not accept the basket of fruits from him, and he said to him: I am disqualified from presiding over your case.

讗讜转讬讘 讝讜讝讗 讚专讘谞谉 讜拽讚讬讬谞讬谉 诇讬讛 讘讛讚讬 讚拽讗讝讬诇 讜讗转讬 讗诪专 讗讬 讘注讬 讟注讬谉 讛讻讬 讜讗讬 讘注讬 讟注讬谉 讛讻讬 讗诪专 转讬驻讞 谞驻砖诐 砖诇 诪拽讘诇讬 砖讜讞讚 讜诪讛 讗谞讬 砖诇讗 谞讟诇转讬 讜讗诐 谞讟诇转讬 砖诇讬 谞讟诇转讬 讻讱 诪拽讘诇讬 砖讜讞讚 注诇 讗讞转 讻诪讛 讜讻诪讛

Rabbi Yishmael seated a pair of rabbinic scholars and they judged the sharecropper鈥檚 case. As Rabbi Yishmael was coming and going, he said to himself: If he wants, he could claim this, and if he wants, he could claim that, i.e., he kept thinking of all the ways in which the litigant who brought him the fruits could win his case. He said to himself: Blast the souls of those who accept bribes. If I, who did not accept anything, and if I had accepted, I would have accepted my own property, as it is my sharecropper and the fruits legally belong to me, am nevertheless in this state of mind due to the proposed gift, all the more so are those who actually accept bribes inevitably biased in favor of the one who bribed them.

专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 讘专 讗诇讬砖注 讗讬讬转讬 诇讬讛 讛讛讜讗 讙讘专讗 专讗砖讬转 讛讙讝 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪讛讬讻讗 讗转 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪讚讜讱 驻诇谉 讜诪讛转诐 诇讛讻讗 诇讗 讛讜讛 讻讛谉 诇诪讬转讘讗 诇讬讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讚讬谞讗 讗讬转 诇讬 讜讗诪讬谞讗 讗讙讘 讗讜专讞讗讬 讗讬讬转讬 诇讬讛 诇诪专 讗诪专 诇讬讛 驻住讬诇谞讗 诇讱 诇讚讬谞讗 诇讗 拽讘讬诇 诪讬谞讬讛

The Gemara likewise relates with regard to Rabbi Yishmael bar Elisha, who was a priest, that a certain man once brought him the first shearing. Rabbi Yishmael said to him: From where are you? The man said to him: I am from such and such a place. Rabbi Yishmael said to him: And from there to here was there no priest to whom you could give the first shearing? He said to him: I have a case to present before you, and I said to myself that along my way I will bring to the Master the first shearing. Rabbi Yishmael said to him: I am disqualified from presiding over your case, and he would not accept the first shearing from him.

讗讜转讬讘 诇讬讛 讝讜讙讗 讚专讘谞谉 讜拽讚讬讬谞讬 诇讬讛 讘讛讚讬 讚拽讗讝讬诇 讜讗转讬 讗诪专 讗讬 讘注讬 讟注讬谉 讛讻讬 讜讗讬 讘注讬 讟注讬谉 讛讻讬 讗诪专 转讬驻讞 谞驻砖诐 砖诇 诪拽讘诇讬 砖讜讞讚 讜诪讛 讗谞讬 砖诇讗 谞讟诇转讬 讜讗诐 谞讟诇转讬 砖诇讬 谞讟诇转讬 讻讱 诪拽讘诇讬 砖讜讞讚 注诇 讗讞转 讻诪讛 讜讻诪讛

Rabbi Yishmael bar Elisha seated a pair of rabbinic scholars and they judged his case. As Rabbi Yishmael was coming and going, he said to himself: If he wants, he could claim this, and if he wants, he could claim that. He said to himself: Blast the souls of those who accept bribes. If I, who did not accept anything, and if I had accepted, I would have accepted my own property, as I am a priest and am entitled to receive the first shearing, am nevertheless in this state of mind, all the more so are those who accept bribes.

专讘 注谞谉 讗讬讬转讬 诇讬讛 讛讛讜讗 讙讘专讗 讻谞转讗 讚讙讬诇讚谞讬 讚讘讬 讙讬诇讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪讗讬 注讘讬讚转讬讱 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讚讬谞讗 讗讬转 诇讬 诇讗 拽讘讬诇 诪讬谞讬讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 驻住讬诇谞讗 诇讱 诇讚讬谞讗

The Gemara relates: There was a certain man who once brought to Rav Anan a basket of small fish [gildanei devei gilei]. He said to him: What are you doing here? The man said to him: I have a case to present before you. Rav Anan would not accept the basket from him, and he said to him: I am disqualified from presiding over your case, due to your actions.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 讚讬谞讗 讚诪专 诇讗 讘注讬谞讗 拽讘讜诇讬 诇拽讘讬诇 诪专 讚诇讗 诇诪谞注谉 诪专 诪讗拽专讜讘讬 讘讻讜专讬诐 讚转谞讬讗 讜讗讬砖 讘讗 诪讘注诇 砖诇讬砖讛 讜讬讘讗 诇讗讬砖 讛讗诇讛讬诐 诇讞诐 讘讻讜专讬诐 注砖专讬诐 诇讞诐 砖注讜专讬诐 讜讻专诪诇 讘爪拽诇讜谞讜 讜讻讬 讗诇讬砖注 讗讜讻诇 讘讻讜专讬诐 讛讜讛 讗诇讗 诇讜诪专 诇讱 讻诇 讛诪讘讬讗 讚讜专讜谉 诇转诇诪讬讚 讞讻诐 讻讗讬诇讜 诪拽专讬讘 讘讻讜专讬诐

The man said to him: I do not need the Master鈥檚 judgment. However, let the Master accept my gift anyway, so that the Master does not prevent me from presenting first fruits. What does the mitzva of first fruits have to with this situation? As it is taught in a baraita: 鈥淎nd there came a man came from Ba鈥檃l Shalisha, and he brought the man of God bread of the first fruits, twenty loaves of barley and fresh ears of corn in his sack鈥 (II聽Kings 4:42). But did Elisha, the recipient of these gifts, eat first fruits? After all, he was not a priest. Rather, this verse comes to tell you: Whoever brings a gift to a Torah scholar, it is as though he has presented first fruits. This visitor to Rav Anan wished to fulfill this mitzva.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 拽讘讜诇讬 诇讗 讘注讬谞谉 讚讗讬拽讘讬诇 讛砖转讗 讚讗诪专转 诇讬 讟注诪讗 诪拽讘讬诇谞讗 砖讚专讬讛 诇拽诪讬讛 讚专讘 谞讞诪谉 砖诇讞 诇讬讛 谞讬讚讬讬谞讬讛 诪专 诇讛讗讬 讙讘专讗 讚讗谞讗 注谞谉 驻住讬诇谞讗 诇讬讛 诇讚讬谞讗 讗诪专 诪讚砖诇讞 诇讬 讛讻讬 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 拽专讬讘讬讛 讛讜讗 讛讜讛 拽讗讬诐 讚讬谞讗 讚讬转诪讬 拽诪讬讛 讗诪专

Rav Anan said to him: I do not want to take it from you, but now that you have explained to me the reason that you wish to give it to me I will accept it from you. Rav Anan sent the man to Rav Na岣an, and he also sent him a letter: Let the Master judge this man鈥檚 case because I, Anan, am disqualified from judging his cases. Rav Na岣an said to himself: From the fact that he sent me this letter, I can conclude from here that the reason he is disqualified from judging the case is because he is his relative. At that time, a case involving orphans was being heard before Rav Na岣an. He said:

Scroll To Top