Why is the talmud concerned about judges being swayed by each other only for capital cases?Why does Yisro appear to have higher standards for judges than Moshe does?How could R' Yochanan make a statement about the Babylonian Talmud?Why do we call the “judges” experts?What do the different terms for “judges” indicate?Seeking Table of Contents for Steinsalz English Edition of the TalmudWhy does the Gemara go through each death penalty?Why do we ask for judges to be restored after Moshiach comes?Why is one obligated to give up one’s life for all mitzvos only with a decree against Judaism and not just persecution?Why does the mishna prescribe an indirect measure of whether somebody knew about a court ruling?Why does the Torah have to explain why judges shouldn't take bribes?
Which attack stat does each starter Pokemon favour in Pokemon Sword and Shield?
Rsync: Are there any way to exclude multiples files and directory shortly?
What is an example of a sequence which "thins out" and is finite?
Unique magic triplets
Why doesn't remove_reference work on functions?
Namespace color scheme
Can I "read" from English books to my infant, but use words from my native language?
TSP with revenue maximization
Why has no one requested the tape of the Trump/Ukraine call?
What kinds of sanctions would be applied if you wrongly invoked the Fifth Amendment?
Days in indexed month
Why does rapeseed oil turn sticky but coconut oil doesn't?
What happened to Eladrin? Did something make them unavailable to play?
Ethics: Is it ethical for a professor to conduct research using a student's ideas without giving them credit?
TV Pilot or Movie, 80s, misfit team with powers
Why superuser permission is needed for accessing /data partition?
What exactly is "Japanese" Salt and Pepper?
How to deal with severe mental fatigue without taking time off?
Change array in javascript into simpler object
Is there a text editor that can run shell scripts?
Raised concerns about a security vulnerability to various managers, for more than a year, with no results. Should I mention it to external auditors?
What should I tell a customer when my co-worker fails to show up to a meeting?
How to exit read-only mode
Arabia and the Middle Ages
Why is the talmud concerned about judges being swayed by each other only for capital cases?
Why does Yisro appear to have higher standards for judges than Moshe does?How could R' Yochanan make a statement about the Babylonian Talmud?Why do we call the “judges” experts?What do the different terms for “judges” indicate?Seeking Table of Contents for Steinsalz English Edition of the TalmudWhy does the Gemara go through each death penalty?Why do we ask for judges to be restored after Moshiach comes?Why is one obligated to give up one’s life for all mitzvos only with a decree against Judaism and not just persecution?Why does the mishna prescribe an indirect measure of whether somebody knew about a court ruling?Why does the Torah have to explain why judges shouldn't take bribes?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty
margin-bottom:0;
.everyonelovesstackoverflowposition:absolute;height:1px;width:1px;opacity:0;top:0;left:0;pointer-events:none;
Sanhedrin 4:2 teaches that in a monetary case or one involving (im)purity, judges give their opinions starting with the most senior, while in a capital case they begin with the most junior. In the g'mara R' Aha b. Papa says one should not speak 'al rab, against the chief of the judges. Apparently, contradicting a judge senior to you who has already given his opinion is a problem.
I understand why we want to be extra-careful in capital cases, but if we are concerned about a senior judge swaying others in a capital case, shouldn't we also be concerned in a monetary case? The Torah is very clear that judges must judge fairly -- always, not just for certain cases. So why do they not always start with the juniormost judge and work up, instead of having two different orders depending on the type of case? It doesn't seem like a hardship to do it this way; everybody is going to speak either way and it's just a matter of ordering.
choshen-mishpat-civil-law beit-din-court maseches-sanhedrin
add a comment
|
Sanhedrin 4:2 teaches that in a monetary case or one involving (im)purity, judges give their opinions starting with the most senior, while in a capital case they begin with the most junior. In the g'mara R' Aha b. Papa says one should not speak 'al rab, against the chief of the judges. Apparently, contradicting a judge senior to you who has already given his opinion is a problem.
I understand why we want to be extra-careful in capital cases, but if we are concerned about a senior judge swaying others in a capital case, shouldn't we also be concerned in a monetary case? The Torah is very clear that judges must judge fairly -- always, not just for certain cases. So why do they not always start with the juniormost judge and work up, instead of having two different orders depending on the type of case? It doesn't seem like a hardship to do it this way; everybody is going to speak either way and it's just a matter of ordering.
choshen-mishpat-civil-law beit-din-court maseches-sanhedrin
add a comment
|
Sanhedrin 4:2 teaches that in a monetary case or one involving (im)purity, judges give their opinions starting with the most senior, while in a capital case they begin with the most junior. In the g'mara R' Aha b. Papa says one should not speak 'al rab, against the chief of the judges. Apparently, contradicting a judge senior to you who has already given his opinion is a problem.
I understand why we want to be extra-careful in capital cases, but if we are concerned about a senior judge swaying others in a capital case, shouldn't we also be concerned in a monetary case? The Torah is very clear that judges must judge fairly -- always, not just for certain cases. So why do they not always start with the juniormost judge and work up, instead of having two different orders depending on the type of case? It doesn't seem like a hardship to do it this way; everybody is going to speak either way and it's just a matter of ordering.
choshen-mishpat-civil-law beit-din-court maseches-sanhedrin
Sanhedrin 4:2 teaches that in a monetary case or one involving (im)purity, judges give their opinions starting with the most senior, while in a capital case they begin with the most junior. In the g'mara R' Aha b. Papa says one should not speak 'al rab, against the chief of the judges. Apparently, contradicting a judge senior to you who has already given his opinion is a problem.
I understand why we want to be extra-careful in capital cases, but if we are concerned about a senior judge swaying others in a capital case, shouldn't we also be concerned in a monetary case? The Torah is very clear that judges must judge fairly -- always, not just for certain cases. So why do they not always start with the juniormost judge and work up, instead of having two different orders depending on the type of case? It doesn't seem like a hardship to do it this way; everybody is going to speak either way and it's just a matter of ordering.
choshen-mishpat-civil-law beit-din-court maseches-sanhedrin
choshen-mishpat-civil-law beit-din-court maseches-sanhedrin
asked Aug 13 at 2:57
Monica CellioMonica Cellio
53.4k8 gold badges89 silver badges291 bronze badges
53.4k8 gold badges89 silver badges291 bronze badges
add a comment
|
add a comment
|
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
Tosafot on Sanhedrin 36a s.v. dinei nefashot is bothered by your question as to why we're not concerned that junior judges can't argue on the senior judge in monetary cases. They suggest two possible resolutions:
A junior judge is always allowed to argue on the senior judge b'derech she'elah (through asking leading questions, rather than directly contradicting him). Thus in monetary cases we can allow the senior judge to speak first - if he says something wrong the junior judges will argue b'derech she'elah. However, in capital cases, we want to be extra-sure that the junior judges will be able to speak up and have their arguments heard, and therefore they speak first.
The rule that one may not speak 'al rab only applies in capital cases. In monetary cases we can allow the senior judge to speak first - if he says something wrong the junior judges are permitted to directly argue against him.
Tosefot Yom Tov to Sanhedrin 4:2 s.v. matchilin addresses the issue of why we have two different orderings. Why not just always start from the most junior, like we do in capital cases? He explains that in general and where possible, it is preferable to begin with the most senior judge, as this displays a level of respect for him.
add a comment
|
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Tosafot on Sanhedrin 36a s.v. dinei nefashot is bothered by your question as to why we're not concerned that junior judges can't argue on the senior judge in monetary cases. They suggest two possible resolutions:
A junior judge is always allowed to argue on the senior judge b'derech she'elah (through asking leading questions, rather than directly contradicting him). Thus in monetary cases we can allow the senior judge to speak first - if he says something wrong the junior judges will argue b'derech she'elah. However, in capital cases, we want to be extra-sure that the junior judges will be able to speak up and have their arguments heard, and therefore they speak first.
The rule that one may not speak 'al rab only applies in capital cases. In monetary cases we can allow the senior judge to speak first - if he says something wrong the junior judges are permitted to directly argue against him.
Tosefot Yom Tov to Sanhedrin 4:2 s.v. matchilin addresses the issue of why we have two different orderings. Why not just always start from the most junior, like we do in capital cases? He explains that in general and where possible, it is preferable to begin with the most senior judge, as this displays a level of respect for him.
add a comment
|
Tosafot on Sanhedrin 36a s.v. dinei nefashot is bothered by your question as to why we're not concerned that junior judges can't argue on the senior judge in monetary cases. They suggest two possible resolutions:
A junior judge is always allowed to argue on the senior judge b'derech she'elah (through asking leading questions, rather than directly contradicting him). Thus in monetary cases we can allow the senior judge to speak first - if he says something wrong the junior judges will argue b'derech she'elah. However, in capital cases, we want to be extra-sure that the junior judges will be able to speak up and have their arguments heard, and therefore they speak first.
The rule that one may not speak 'al rab only applies in capital cases. In monetary cases we can allow the senior judge to speak first - if he says something wrong the junior judges are permitted to directly argue against him.
Tosefot Yom Tov to Sanhedrin 4:2 s.v. matchilin addresses the issue of why we have two different orderings. Why not just always start from the most junior, like we do in capital cases? He explains that in general and where possible, it is preferable to begin with the most senior judge, as this displays a level of respect for him.
add a comment
|
Tosafot on Sanhedrin 36a s.v. dinei nefashot is bothered by your question as to why we're not concerned that junior judges can't argue on the senior judge in monetary cases. They suggest two possible resolutions:
A junior judge is always allowed to argue on the senior judge b'derech she'elah (through asking leading questions, rather than directly contradicting him). Thus in monetary cases we can allow the senior judge to speak first - if he says something wrong the junior judges will argue b'derech she'elah. However, in capital cases, we want to be extra-sure that the junior judges will be able to speak up and have their arguments heard, and therefore they speak first.
The rule that one may not speak 'al rab only applies in capital cases. In monetary cases we can allow the senior judge to speak first - if he says something wrong the junior judges are permitted to directly argue against him.
Tosefot Yom Tov to Sanhedrin 4:2 s.v. matchilin addresses the issue of why we have two different orderings. Why not just always start from the most junior, like we do in capital cases? He explains that in general and where possible, it is preferable to begin with the most senior judge, as this displays a level of respect for him.
Tosafot on Sanhedrin 36a s.v. dinei nefashot is bothered by your question as to why we're not concerned that junior judges can't argue on the senior judge in monetary cases. They suggest two possible resolutions:
A junior judge is always allowed to argue on the senior judge b'derech she'elah (through asking leading questions, rather than directly contradicting him). Thus in monetary cases we can allow the senior judge to speak first - if he says something wrong the junior judges will argue b'derech she'elah. However, in capital cases, we want to be extra-sure that the junior judges will be able to speak up and have their arguments heard, and therefore they speak first.
The rule that one may not speak 'al rab only applies in capital cases. In monetary cases we can allow the senior judge to speak first - if he says something wrong the junior judges are permitted to directly argue against him.
Tosefot Yom Tov to Sanhedrin 4:2 s.v. matchilin addresses the issue of why we have two different orderings. Why not just always start from the most junior, like we do in capital cases? He explains that in general and where possible, it is preferable to begin with the most senior judge, as this displays a level of respect for him.
edited Aug 13 at 16:29
answered Aug 13 at 6:11
Joel KJoel K
22.5k2 gold badges36 silver badges116 bronze badges
22.5k2 gold badges36 silver badges116 bronze badges
add a comment
|
add a comment
|