Sanhedrin 14
בָּטְלוּ דִּינֵי קְנָסוֹת מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל, שֶׁפַּעַם אַחַת גָּזְרָה מַלְכוּת הָרְשָׁעָה שְׁמָד עַל יִשְׂרָאֵל – שֶׁכׇּל הַסּוֹמֵךְ יֵהָרֵג, וְכׇל הַנִּסְמָךְ יֵהָרֵג, וְעִיר שֶׁסּוֹמְכִין בָּהּ תֵּיחָרֵב, וּתְחוּמִין שֶׁסּוֹמְכִין בָּהֶן יֵעָקְרוּ.
the laws of fines would have ceased to be implemented from among the Jewish people, as they would not have been able to adjudicate cases involving these laws due to a lack of ordained judges. This is because at one time the wicked kingdom of Rome issued decrees of religious persecution against the Jewish people with the aim of abolishing the chain of ordination and the authority of the Sages. They said that anyone who ordains judges will be killed, and anyone who is ordained will be killed, and the city in which they ordain the judges will be destroyed, and the signs identifying the boundaries of the city in which they ordain judges will be uprooted. These measures were intended to discourage the Sages from performing or receiving ordination due to fear for the welfare of the local population.
מָה עָשָׂה יְהוּדָה בֶּן בָּבָא? הָלַךְ וְיָשַׁב לוֹ בֵּין שְׁנֵי הָרִים גְּדוֹלִים, וּבֵין שְׁתֵּי עֲיָירוֹת גְּדוֹלוֹת, וּבֵין שְׁנֵי תְּחוּמֵי שַׁבָּת, בֵּין אוּשָׁא לִשְׁפַרְעָם, וְסָמַךְ שָׁם חֲמִשָּׁה זְקֵנִים. וְאֵלּוּ הֵן: רַבִּי מֵאִיר, וְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה, וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, וְרַבִּי יוֹסֵי, וְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן שַׁמּוּעַ. רַב אַוְיָא מוֹסִיף: אַף רַבִּי נְחֶמְיָה.
What did Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava do? He went and sat between two large mountains, between two large cities, and between two Shabbat boundaries: Between Usha and Shefaram, i.e., in a desolate place that was not associated with any particular city so that he not endanger anyone not directly involved, and there he ordained five elders. And they were: Rabbi Meir, and Rabbi Yehuda, and Rabbi Shimon, and Rabbi Yosei, and Rabbi Elazar ben Shammua. Rav Avya adds that Rabbi Neḥemya was also among those ordained. This incident indicates that ordination can be performed by a single Sage.
כֵּיוָן שֶׁהִכִּירוּ אוֹיְבֵיהֶם בָּהֶן, אָמַר לָהֶן: בָּנַיי, רוּצוּ! אָמְרוּ לוֹ: רַבִּי, מָה תְּהֵא עָלֶיךָ? אָמַר לָהֶן: הֲרֵינִי מוּטָל לִפְנֵיהֶם כְּאֶבֶן שֶׁאֵין לָהּ הוֹפְכִים. אָמְרוּ: לֹא זָזוּ מִשָּׁם עַד שֶׁנָּעֲצוּ בּוֹ שְׁלֹשׁ מֵאוֹת לוּנְכִיאוֹת שֶׁל בַּרְזֶל וַעֲשָׂאוּהוּ כִּכְבָרָה.
When their enemies discovered them, Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava said to the newly ordained Sages: My sons, run for your lives. They said to him: My teacher, what will be with you? Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava was elderly and unable to run. He said to them: In any case, I am cast before them like a stone that cannot be overturned; even if you attempt to assist me I will not be able to escape due to my frailty, but if you do not escape without me you will also be killed. People say about this incident: The Roman soldiers did not move from there until they had inserted three hundred iron spears [lunkhiyot] into him, making him appear like a sieve pierced with many holes.
רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶּן בָּבָא אַחֲרִינֵי הֲווֹ בַּהֲדֵיהּ, וְהַאי דְּלָא חָשֵׁיב לְהוּ – מִשּׁוּם כְּבוֹדוֹ דְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶּן בָּבָא. וְרַבִּי מֵאִיר, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶּן בָּבָא סַמְכֵיהּ? וְהָא אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: כׇּל הָאוֹמֵר רַבִּי מֵאִיר לֹא סְמָכוֹ רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אֵינוֹ אֶלָּא טוֹעֶה! סַמְכֵיהּ רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא וְלֹא קַיבְּלוּהּ, סְמָכֶיהָ רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶּן בָּבָא וְקַיבְּלוּהּ.
This proof is refuted: There may have been other Sages performing the ordination with Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava, who were added in order to reach the quota of three Sages, and this fact that they were not mentioned is due to the honor of Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava, who was the greatest among them. The Gemara asks: And with regard to Rabbi Meir, did Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava actually ordain him? But doesn’t Rabba bar bar Ḥana say that Rabbi Yoḥanan says: Anyone who says that Rabbi Akiva did not ordain Rabbi Meir is nothing other than mistaken. The Gemara answers: Rabbi Akiva in fact ordained Rabbi Meir, but the people did not accept the appointment, as Rabbi Meir was still very young. Therefore, some time later, Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava ordained him a second time, and they accepted it.
אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי: אֵין סְמִיכָה בְּחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ. מַאי ״אֵין סְמִיכָה״? אִילֵּימָא דְּלָא דָּיְינִי דִּינֵי קְנָסוֹת כְּלָל בְּחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ, וְהָא תְּנַן: סַנְהֶדְרִין נוֹהֶגֶת בֵּין בָּאָרֶץ וּבֵין בְּחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ! אֶלָּא, דְּלָא סָמְכִינַן בְּחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ.
§ Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says: There is no ordination outside of Eretz Yisrael. The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of: There is no ordination? If we say that they may not adjudicate cases involving laws of fines at all outside of Eretz Yisrael, that is difficult: Didn’t we learn in a mishna (Makkot 7a): The Sanhedrin and its authority functions both in Eretz Yisrael and outside of Eretz Yisrael? Rather, the intention is that we do not ordain judges outside of Eretz Yisrael.
פְּשִׁיטָא: סוֹמְכִין בְּחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ וְנִסְמָכִין בָּאָרֶץ, הָא אָמְרִינַן דְּלָא. אֶלָּא, סוֹמְכִין בָּאָרֶץ וְנִסְמָכִין בְּחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ – מַאי?
The Gemara comments: It is obvious that if those ordaining the new judges were outside of Eretz Yisrael, and those being ordained were inside Eretz Yisrael, we say that they may not perform the ordination. But if those ordaining the new judges were inside Eretz Yisrael, and those being ordained were outside of Eretz Yisrael, what is the halakha? May ordination be conferred from a distance in this situation?
תָּא שְׁמַע: דְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן הֲוָה מִצְטַעֵר עֲלֵיהּ דְּרַב שֶׁמֶן בַּר אַבָּא, דְּלָא הֲוָה גַּבַּיְיהוּ דְּלִיסְמְכֵיהּ. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן זֵירוּד וְחַד דְּעִימֵּיהּ, וּמַנּוּ? רַבִּי יוֹנָתָן בֶּן עַכְמַאי. וְאָמְרִי לַהּ: רַבִּי יוֹנָתָן בֶּן עַכְמַאי וְחַד דְּעִימֵּיהּ, וּמַנּוּ? רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן זֵירוּד. חַד דַּהֲוָה גַּבַּיְיהוּ – סַמְכוּהּו, וְחַד דְּלָא הֲוָה גַּבַּיְיהוּ – לָא סַמְכוּהּו.
The Gemara clarifies: Come and hear a resolution to the dilemma from the fact that Rabbi Yoḥanan was distressed concerning Rav Shemen bar Abba, as the latter was not with the other Sages at the time they received the consent of the Nasi so that Rabbi Yoḥanan could ordain him. In addition, concerning Rabbi Shimon ben Zeirud and one who was with him, the Gemara interjects: And who is he? Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Akhmai. And some say that it was Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Akhmai and one who was with him; the Gemara interjects: And who is he? Rabbi Shimon ben Zeirud. The Gemara continues: Although these two Sages were equal in stature, the Sages ordained only the one who was with them in Eretz Yisrael, and they did not ordain the other one, who was not with them. This indicates that ordination can be granted only in Eretz Yisrael.
רַבִּי חֲנִינָא וְרַבִּי הוֹשַׁעְיָא הֲוָה קָא מִשְׁתְּקִיד רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן לְמִיסְמְכִינְהוּ. לָא הֲוָה מִסְתַּיְּיעָא מִילְּתָא, הֲוָה קָא מִצְטַעַר טוּבָא. אֲמַרוּ לֵיהּ: לָא נִצְטַעַר מָר, דַּאֲנַן מִדְּבֵית עֵלִי קָאָתֵינַן.
The Gemara relates several other incidents with regard to ordination. Rabbi Yoḥanan persistently tried to ordain Rabbi Ḥanina and Rabbi Hoshaya, as they were scholars and righteous people. But he was not successful with regard to the matter, as various incidents repeatedly interfered with his plan, and he was very distressed about this. They said to him: Do not be distressed, our Master, as we come from, i.e., are descendants of, the house of the High Priest Eli.
דְּאָמַר רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָן אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹנָתָן: מִנַּיִין שֶׁאֵין נִסְמָכִין לְבֵית עֵלִי? שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״לֹא יִהְיֶה זָקֵן בְּבֵיתְךָ כׇּל הַיָּמִים״. מַאי זָקֵן? אִילֵּימָא זָקֵן מַמָּשׁ, וְהָכְתִיב: ״כׇּל מַרְבִּית בֵּיתְךָ יָמוּתוּ אֲנָשִׁים״! אֶלָּא סְמִיכָה.
As Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman says that Rabbi Yonatan says: From where is it known that there are not to be ordained Sages from the house of Eli? As it is stated with regard to the house of Eli: “And there shall not be an elder in your house forever” (I Samuel 2:32). The Gemara explains: What is the meaning of “elder” in this verse? If we say it means an actual elder, meaning an old person, but isn’t it already written: “And all those raised in your house shall die young men” (I Samuel 2:33)? Rather, the term “elder” is an honorary term for a Sage, and it means that ordination will not be granted to descendants of the House of Eli.
רַבִּי זֵירָא הֲוָה מִיטַּמַּר מִלְּמִיסְמְכֵיהּ, דְּאָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: לְעוֹלָם הֱוֵה קָבֵל וְקַיָּים. כֵּיוָן דְּשַׁמְעַהּ לְהָא דְּאָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר, אֵין אָדָם עוֹלֶה לִגְדוּלָּה אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן מוֹחֲלִין לוֹ עַל כׇּל עֲוֹנוֹתָיו, אַמְצִי נַפְשֵׁיהּ.
The Gemara relates: Rabbi Zeira would habitually hide himself so that they would not ordain him. He did this due to the fact that Rabbi Elazar said: Always be obscure and remain alive, meaning the more humble and unknown you make yourself, the longer you will live. When he heard that which Rabbi Elazar also said: A person does not rise to greatness unless all his sins are forgiven, he understood that there are also benefits to greatness, and he presented himself to the Nasi in order that he would ordain him.
כִּי סַמְכוּהּ לְרַבִּי זֵירָא, שָׁרוּ לֵיהּ הָכִי: ״לֹא כַּחַל וְלֹא שָׂרָק וְלֹא פִּירְכּוּס, וְיַעֲלַת חֵן״. כִּי סַמְכוּהּ לְרַבִּי אַמֵּי וּלְרַבִּי אַסִּי, שָׁרוּ לְהוּ הָכִי: ״כֹּל מִן דֵּין, כֹּל מִן דֵּין, סְמוּכוּ לַנָא. לָא תִּסְמְכוּ לַנָא לָא מִסַּרְמִיטִין וְלָא מִסַּרְמִיסִין״. וְאָמְרִי לַהּ: ״לָא מֵחֲמִיסִין וְלָא מִטּוּרְמִיסִין״.
The Gemara relates: When they ordained Rabbi Zeira the Sages who were present at the ceremony sang to him this paean of praise traditionally sung to a bride at her wedding: She wears no blue eye shadow and no rouge on her face and no hair dye, and nevertheless she radiates grace. The bride is described as so beautiful that she does not need any cosmetics or adornments, and metaphorically Rabbi Zeira is praised as exceptionally and recognizably qualified for his appointment. Similarly, when they ordained Rabbi Ami and Rabbi Asi, they sang to them this paean of praise: Anyone like these, anyone like these, ordain for us, as they epitomized the ideal candidate for ordination. But do not ordain for us those counted among the rags [misarmitin] or among the distorters [misarmisin]. And some say that they said: Do not ordain for us those counted among the robbers [meḥamisin] or among the tramplers [miturmisin].
רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ, כִּי הֲוָה אָתֵי מִמְּתִיבְתָּא לְבֵי קֵיסָר, נָפְקִי מַטְרוֹנְיָתָא דְּבֵי קֵיסָר וּמְשַׁרְיָין לֵיהּ: ״רַבָּה דְּעַמֵּיהּ, מְדַבְּרָנָא דְּאוּמְּתֵיהּ, בּוּצִינָא דִּנְהוֹרָא, בְּרִיךְ מֵתְיָיךְ לִשְׁלָם״.
Since the songs composed for various Sages were mentioned, the Gemara also recounts that when Rabbi Abbahu would come from the yeshiva to the house of the emperor, the ladies from the emperor’s house would go out and sing before him: O great one of his people, leader of his nation, illuminating candle, may your arrival be blessed in peace.
עֲרִיפַת עֶגְלָה בִּשְׁלֹשָׁה. תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״וְיָצְאוּ זְקֵנֶיךָ וְשֹׁפְטֶיךָ״. ״זְקֵנֶיךָ״ – שְׁנַיִם, ״שֹׁפְטֶיךָ״ – שְׁנַיִם, וְאֵין בֵּית דִּין שָׁקוּל מוֹסִיפִין עֲלֵיהֶן עוֹד אֶחָד, הֲרֵי כָּאן חֲמִשָּׁה. דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: ״זְקֵנֶיךָ״ – שְׁנַיִם, וְאֵין בֵּית דִּין שָׁקוּל מוֹסִיפִין עֲלֵיהֶם עוֹד אֶחָד, הֲרֵי כָּאן שְׁלֹשָׁה.
§ The mishna teaches that the breaking of the heifer’s neck is performed in front of a panel of three judges, and that Rabbi Yehuda says there must be five judges. The Sages taught in a baraita: The verse states: “And your elders and your judges shall go out and they shall measure to the cities that are around the corpse” (Deuteronomy 21:2). “Your elders” is in the plural, which indicates a minimum of two, and “your judges” is also plural, indicating another two, and as a court may not be composed of an even number of judges, they add an additional one to them, so there are five judges here; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Shimon says: “Your elders,” indicate two, and as a court may not be composed of an even number of judges, they add an additional one to them, so there are three judges here.
וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, הַאי ״שֹׁפְטֶיךָ״ מַאי עָבֵיד לֵיהּ? הַהוּא מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ לִמְיוּחָדִין שֶׁבְּשׁוֹפְטֶיךָ. וְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה? מִ״זִּקְנֵי״ ״זְקֵנֶיךָ״ נָפְקָא.
The Gemara asks: But according to Rabbi Shimon, what does he do with this extra expression: “Your judges”? The Gemara answers: He requires it to teach that these judges must be of the unique ones among your judges, meaning that they must be members of the Sanhedrin. The Gemara asks: And how does Rabbi Yehuda derive the halakha that the judges must be members of the Sanhedrin? He derives it from the fact that the verse did not merely state: “Elders,” but rather: “Your elders,” which indicates the elders that are unique to all of the Jewish people, meaning the Sages of the Sanhedrin.
וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן: אִי מִ״זִּקְנֵי״ הֲוָה אָמֵינָא זִקְנֵי הַשּׁוּק, כְּתַב רַחֲמָנָא ״זְקֵנֶיךָ״. וְאִי כְּתִיב ״זְקֵנֶיךָ״ – הֲוָה אָמֵינָא סַנְהֶדְרִי קְטַנָּה, כְּתַב רַחֲמָנָא ״וְשֹׁפְטֶיךָ״ – מִמְּיוּחָדִין שֶׁבְּשׁוֹפְטֶיךָ. וְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה גָּמַר ״זִקְנֵי״ ״זִקְנֵי״ מִ״וְסָמְכוּ זִקְנֵי הָעֵדָה אֶת יְדֵיהֶם״ – מָה לְהַלָּן מְיוּחָדִין שֶׁבָּעֵדָה, אַף כָּאן מְיוּחָדִין שֶׁבִּזְקֵנֶיךָ.
And how does Rabbi Shimon respond to this claim? He holds that had the verse written only: “Elders,” I would say that the verse is referring to any elders in the marketplace who are not members of the Sanhedrin. Therefore, the Merciful One writes: “Your elders.” And if it was written: “Your elders,” I would say that it is referring to members of a lesser Sanhedrin. Therefore, the Merciful One writes: “And your judges,” to indicate that they must be of the unique ones among your judges. And how would Rabbi Yehuda respond to this claim? He learns it by means of a verbal analogy from the word “elders” written in this verse and the word “elders” written in the verse: “And the elders of the congregation shall lay their hands on the head of the bull” (Leviticus 4:15). Just as there it is referring to the unique ones of the congregation, so too here, it is referring to the unique ones among your elders.
אִי יָלֵיף – לֵילַף כּוּלַּהּ מֵהָתָם! ״זְקֵנֶיךָ״ ״וְשֹׁפְטֶיךָ״ לְמָה לִי? אֶלָּא, וָיו ״וְשֹׁפְטֶיךָ״ לְמִנְיָינָא. וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן – וָיו לָא דָּרֵישׁ.
The Gemara asks: If he learns this verbal analogy, he should learn all of it, i.e., the entire halakha, including the number of judges as well as their rank, from there, i.e., the verse in Leviticus, and if so why do I need the extra expressions: “Your elders” and: “And your judges”? Rather, certainly he does not accept this verbal analogy. Rather, he holds that the additional letter vav, corresponding to the word “and” in the expression: “And your judges,” is there for the tally, meaning that the expression “your judges” teaches that they must be members of the Great Sanhedrin, and the additional vav serves to add an additional two to the number of judges. And how does Rabbi Shimon respond to that? He does not expound the additional letter vav.
אֶלָּא מֵעַתָּה, ״וְיָצְאוּ״ – שְׁנַיִם, ״וּמָדְדוּ״ – שְׁנַיִם, לְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה הֲרֵי תִּשְׁעָה, לְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן שִׁבְעָה? הָהוּא מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ לְכִדְתַנְיָא: ״וְיָצְאוּ״ – הֵן וְלֹא שְׁלוּחָן, ״וּמָדְדוּ״ – שֶׁאֲפִילּוּ נִמְצָא
The Gemara asks: If that is so, if the verbs in the plural form are each understood as adding an additional two judges, then the expression: “And they shall go out,” in the continuation of the verse (Deuteronomy 21:2) indicates another two, and the expression: “And they shall measure,” adds another two, meaning that according to Rabbi Yehuda there should be nine judges, and according to Rabbi Shimon, seven. The Gemara answers: He needs this exposition for that which is taught in a baraita: The verse states: “And they shall go out,” to emphasize that they must go out, and not their agents, and the verse states: “And they shall measure,” to teach that this measurement is itself a mitzva, such that even if the corpse is found
בַּעֲלִיל לָעִיר, צָרִיךְ לַעֲסוֹק בִּמְדִידָה.
clearly close to the city, so that there is no need to measure in order to determine the closest city, nevertheless they must involve themselves with the measurement.
מַתְנִיתִין דְּלָא כִּי הַאי תַּנָּא, דְּתַנְיָא: רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר: ״וְיָצְאוּ זְקֵנֶיךָ וְשֹׁפְטֶיךָ״, ״זְקֵנֶיךָ״ – זוֹ סַנְהֶדְרִין, ״וְשֹׁפְטֶיךָ״ – זֶה מֶלֶךְ וְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל. מֶלֶךְ – דִּכְתִיב: ״מֶלֶךְ בַּמִּשְׁפָּט יַעֲמִיד אָרֶץ״. כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל – דִּכְתִיב: ״וּבָאתָ אֶל הַכֹּהֲנִים הַלְוִיִּם וְאֶל הַשֹּׁפֵט״.
§ The Gemara comments: The mishna is not in accordance with the opinion of this tanna, as it is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov says: With regard to the breaking of the neck of the heifer, the verse states: “And your elders and your judges shall go out” (Deuteronomy 21:2). “Your elders,” this is referring to the Sanhedrin; “and your judges,” this is referring to the king and the High Priest. The baraita explains the assertion that the king is called a judge, as it is written: “The king by justice establishes the land” (Proverbs 29:4), and the High Priest is also called a judge, as it is written: “And you shall come to the priests the Levites, and to the judge that will be in those days” (Deuteronomy 17:9), referring to the High Priest.
אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב בַּחֲדָא פְּלִיג אוֹ בְּתַרְתֵּי פְּלִיג? בְּמֶלֶךְ וְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל פְּלִיג, אֲבָל בְּסַנְהֶדְרֵי – אִי כְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה אִי כְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן? אוֹ דִילְמָא בְּסַנְהֶדְרֵי נָמֵי פְּלִיג, דְּאָמַר: כּוּלַּהּ סַנְהֶדְרִי בָּעֵינַן?
A dilemma was raised before the Sages: Does Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov disagree with the tanna’im of the mishna only with regard to one matter, or does he disagree with regard to two matters? Does he disagree only with regard to the requirement for the king and the High Priest to participate in the measurement, but with regard to the Sanhedrin he holds either in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda or in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon? Or perhaps he disagrees with regard to the Sanhedrin, too, as he says we require all of the members of the Sanhedrin to participate in the measurement.
אָמַר רַב יוֹסֵף: תָּא שְׁמַע, מְצָאָן אַבֵּית פַּגֵּי וְהִמְרָה עֲלֵיהֶן, יָכוֹל תְּהֵא הַמְרָאָתוֹ הַמְרָאָה? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״וְקַמְתָּ וְעָלִיתָ אֶל הַמָּקוֹם״, מְלַמֵּד שֶׁהַמָּקוֹם גּוֹרֵם.
Rav Yosef said: Come and hear a solution to this dilemma from a baraita discussing the case of a rebellious elder, a Sage who publicly teaches a halakha against the ruling of the Great Sanhedrin: If the rebellious elder found the members of the Sanhedrin in Beit Pagei outside of Jerusalem and rebelled against them by rejecting their decision, one might have thought that his rebellion is deemed a rebellion and he will be liable to receive the death penalty if he instructs the public to follow his opinion. Therefore, the verse states: “And you shall arise and go up to the place that the Lord your God shall choose” (Deuteronomy 17:8), and this teaches that the location determines the authority of the Sanhedrin; to a certain extent this authority exists only when the Sanhedrin is situated in the Chamber of Hewn Stone, adjacent to the Temple.
דִּנְפוּק כַּמָּה? אִילֵּימָא מִקְצָתָן, דִּילְמָא הָנָךְ דְּאִיכָּא גַּוַּאי קָיְימִי כְּוָותֵיהּ? אֶלָּא פְּשִׁיטָא דִּנְפוּק כּוּלְּהוּ. לְמַאי? אִילֵימָא לִדְבַר הָרְשׁוּת, מִי מָצוּ נָפְקִי? וְהָכְתִיב: ״שׇׁרְרֵךְ אַגַּן הַסַּהַר אַל יֶחְסַר הַמָּזֶג״! אֶלָּא פְּשִׁיטָא לִדְבַר מִצְוָה.
The Gemara clarifies: In the case discussed in the baraita, how many members of the Sanhedrin went out to Beit Pagei? If we say that only some of them went out, there is no significance in such a ruling issued by the rebellious elder, as perhaps those who are inside the Chamber of Hewn Stone are the majority and hold in accordance with his opinion; in which case he certainly would not be deemed a rebellious elder. Rather, it is obvious that they all went out. And for what reason did they go out? If we say that they did so for an optional matter, may they go out? But isn’t it written: “Your navel is like a round goblet wherein no blended wine is lacking” (Song of Songs 7:3), from which it is inferred that the Sanhedrin sit in a half-circle, and there must never be more than two-thirds of them lacking, as this is the measure of wine blended in water. Rather, since the Sanhedrin may not leave the chamber unnecessarily, it is obvious that they went out for a matter relating to a mitzva.
הֵיכִי דָּמֵי? לָאו לִמְדִידַת עֶגְלָה, וְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב הִיא, דְּאָמַר: כּוּלֵּי סַנְהֶדְרֵי בָּעֵינַן? אֲמַר לֵיהּ אַבָּיֵי: לָא, כְּגוֹן שֶׁיָּצְאוּ לְהוֹסִיף עַל הָעִיר וְעַל הָעֲזָרוֹת, כְּדִתְנַן: אֵין מוֹסִיפִין עַל הָעִיר וְעַל הָעֲזָרוֹת אֶלָּא בְּבֵית דִּין שֶׁל שִׁבְעִים וְאֶחָד.
What are the circumstances? Is it not that they went out to measure the distance between a murder victim and the nearest city, in order to perform the ritual of the breaking of the neck of the heifer, and it is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov, from which it can be deduced that he says: We require all of the Sanhedrin to participate? Abaye said to him: No, that cannot be proven from here, as perhaps it is a case where they went out to extend the city of Jerusalem or the courtyards of the Temple, as we learned in the mishna: They may extend the city or the courtyards of the Temple only in accordance with the ruling of a court of seventy-one judges.
תַּנְיָא כְּוָותֵיהּ דְּרַב יוֹסֵף: מְצָאָן אַבֵּית פָּאגֵי וְהִמְרָה עֲלֵיהֶן, כְּגוֹן שֶׁיָּצְאוּ לִמְדִידַת עֶגְלָה וּלְהוֹסִיף עַל הָעִיר וְעַל הָעֲזָרוֹת, יָכוֹל שֶׁתְּהֵא הַמְרָאָתוֹ הַמְרָאָה? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״וְקַמְתָּ וְעָלִיתָ אֶל הַמָּקוֹם״, מְלַמֵּד שֶׁהַמָּקוֹם גּוֹרֵם.
It is taught in a baraita in accordance with the opinion of Rav Yosef: If he found them in Beit Pagei and rebelled against them, such as in a situation where they went out to measure the distance between a murder victim and the nearest city, in order to perform the ceremony of the breaking of the neck of the heifer or to extend the city or the courtyards, one might have thought that his rebellion is deemed a rebellion. Therefore, the verse states: “And you shall arise and go up to the place,” which teaches that the location determines the authority of the Sanhedrin. This proves that there is a tanna who maintains that all of the members of the Sanhedrin must participate in the measurement.
נֶטַע רְבָעִי וּמַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי שֶׁאֵין דָּמָיו יְדוּעִין, בִּשְׁלֹשָׁה. תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: אֵיזֶהוּ מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי שֶׁאֵין דָּמָיו יְדוּעִין? פֵּירוֹת שֶׁהִרְקִיבוּ, וְיַיִן שֶׁהִקְרִיס, וּמָעוֹת שֶׁהֶחְלִידוּ. תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי שֶׁאֵין דָּמָיו יְדוּעִין, פּוֹדִין אוֹתוֹ בִּשְׁלֹשָׁה לָקוֹחוֹת, אֲבָל לֹא בִּשְׁלֹשָׁה שֶׁאֵין לָקוֹחוֹת. אֲפִילּוּ גּוֹי אֶחָד מֵהֶן, אֲפִילּוּ אֶחָד מֵהֶם בְּעָלִים.
§ The mishna teaches: Valuations of the fruits of a fourth-year sapling or second-tithe produce in cases where their value is not known is performed by three judges. The Sages taught in a baraita: What is the second tithe whose value is not known and requires a special court to assess it? This is fruit that has decomposed, and wine that has developed a film, and coins that have become rusted and cannot be traded at full value. Therefore, there is a need for expert assessment. The Sages taught in another baraita: The second tithe whose value is not known may be redeemed by three purchasers, i.e., experts in trade, but not by three ordinary people who are not purchasers. This may be done even if one of them is a gentile, and even if one of them is the owner.
בָּעֵי רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה: שְׁלֹשָׁה וּמְטִילִין לְתוֹךְ כִּיס אֶחָד, מַהוּ? תָּא שְׁמַע: אִישׁ וּשְׁתֵּי נָשָׁיו פּוֹדִין מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי שֶׁאֵין דָּמָיו יְדוּעִין. דִּילְמָא כְּגוֹן רַב פָּפָּא וּבַת אַבָּא סוּרָאָה.
Rabbi Yirmeya asks: Concerning three people who deposit their funds into one single purse, meaning they are partners in expenses and profits, what is the halakha? With regard to valuations, are they considered as three people or as one? The Gemara answers: Come and hear a solution to the matter from a baraita: A man and his two wives may redeem produce of the second tithe where its value is unknown. It is apparent that three partners are considered a court for this matter. The Gemara rejects this proof: Perhaps this was a case of a marriage with special arrangements, such as that between Rav Pappa and his wife, the daughter of Abba of Sura. Rav Pappa and his wife handled their finances independently; she had her own property and was responsible for her own expenses.
הַהֶקְדֵּשׁוֹת בִּשְׁלֹשָׁה. מַתְנִיתִין דְּלָא כִּי הַאי תַּנָּא, דְּתַנְיָא: רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר, אֲפִילּוּ צִינּוֹרָא שֶׁל הֶקְדֵּשׁ צְרִיכָה עֲשָׂרָה בְּנֵי אָדָם לִפְדּוֹתָהּ.
§ The mishna teaches that the valuation of consecrated property is performed by three judges. The Gemara comments: The mishna is not in accordance with the opinion of this tanna, as it is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov says: Even a simple item such as a small fork of consecrated property requires a valuation by ten people in order to redeem it.
אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב פָּפָּא לְאַבָּיֵי: בִּשְׁלָמָא לְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב, דְּאָמַר כִּשְׁמוּאֵל, דְּאָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: עֲשָׂרָה כֹּהֲנִים כְּתוּבִין בַּפָּרָשָׁה, אֶלָּא לְרַבָּנַן – שְׁלֹשָׁה מְנָא לְהוּ?
Rav Pappa said to Abaye: Granted, the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov can be understood, since what he says is in accordance with the opinion of Shmuel. As Shmuel says: Ten priests are written in this Torah portion, meaning the word “priest” appears ten times in the passage discussing consecrated property and redeeming consecrated property (Leviticus, chapter 27). For each time the word “priest” is stated, a judge is added to the court that must endorse the calculation of the redemption, leading to a total of ten judges. But according to the opinion of the Rabbis, from where do they derive a requirement for three judges?
וְכִי תֵּימָא דִּכְתִיב בְּהוּ שְׁלֹשָׁה, קַרְקָעוֹת דִּכְתִיב בְּהוּ אַרְבָּעָה תִּיסְגֵּי בְּאַרְבָּעָה? וְכִי תֵּימָא: הָכִי נָמֵי, אַלְּמָה תְּנַן: הַקַּרְקָעוֹת תִּשְׁעָה וְכֹהֵן?
And if you would say that the word “priest” is written with regard to them, i.e., with regard to the specific halakha of redeeming a consecrated animal, which can be generalized to any case of movable property, only three times (Leviticus 27:11–12), then in a case of redeeming land, with regard to which the word “priest,” is written four times (Leviticus 27:14, 18, 23), it should be enough to perform the valuation in a court of four judges. And if you would say: Indeed that is the case, why did we learn in the mishna that the valuation of consecrated land is performed by nine judges and one priest?
אֶלָּא מַאי, דְּמַשְׁלְמִי בְּהוּ עֲשָׂרָה? הֶקְדֵּשׁוֹת, דְּמַשְׁלְמִי בְּהוּ שִׁיתָּא, לִיבְעוֹ שִׁיתָּא! קַשְׁיָא.
Rather, what would you say? That the count of ten instances of the word “priest” written in the section is completed with these, meaning that there is a cumulative calculation of all mentions of the word since the beginning of the passage? If so, concerning consecrated items such as animals, given that a similar cumulative count of six is completed with them, they should require six judges to perform the valuation. The Gemara concludes: Indeed, the matter is difficult.
הָעֲרָכִין כּוּ׳. מַאי עֲרָכִין הַמִּטַּלְטְלִין? אָמַר רַב גִּידֵּל אָמַר רַב: בְּאוֹמֵר ״עֵרֶךְ כְּלִי זֶה עָלַי״. דְּאָמַר רַב גִּידֵּל אָמַר רַב:
§ The mishna teaches that the valuations that are movable property are performed by three judges. The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of: Valuations that are movable property? The term: Valuations, generally is referring to a unique type of calculation in which one vows to contribute the value of a person, according to the set amounts explicitly stated in the Torah (see Leviticus 27:1–8). This type of calculation does not apply to property, so to what does the mishna refer? Rav Giddel says that Rav says: The mishna was discussing a case where one says: The valuation of this utensil is incumbent upon me to contribute. As Rav Giddel says that Rav says:
