Share Mishnayos Sanhedrin
Save to Folder
If one witness says the event happened on the 2nd of the month and the other says the 3rd, is that a contradiction? Why or why not?
No, because the difference can be explained by whether or not they knew that the previous month had an extra day.
How can a difference in the date be explained in this case?
One witness counted based on a month with 29 days, the other counted based on a month with 30 days.
If one says the 3rd of the month and one says the 5th, is the testimony valid? Why?
No, because the difference is too large to be a simple mistake.
If one says the event was at 2 hours and the other says 3 hours, is the testimony valid? Why?
Yes, because people can easily make a small error in estimating the hour.
What is the rule if one says 3 hours and the other says 5 hours according to the Chachomim?
Their testimony is invalid because the gap is too big.
What does R’ Yehuda say about testimony where one says 3 hours and the other says 5 hours?
He says it’s still valid
According to R’ Yehuda, why would 3 hours and 5 hours still be acceptable?
Because a person could make that large of a mistake in judging time.
What does R’ Yehuda say about a difference between 5 hours and 7 hours?
It’s invalid.
Why does R’ Yehuda say that 5 hours and 7 hours cannot be confused?
Because at 5 hours the sun is in the east and at 7 it’s in the west
How does the sun’s position help explain the difference between 5 hours and 7 hours?
The change is obvious to everyone, so such a mistake would be impossible.
What happens after the court finishes examining the first witness?
They bring in the second witness and examine him.
What must be true about the two witnesses’ statements for the court to deliberate?
Their statements must match in the important details.
When the court begins deliberations, what do they first invite people to do?
They ask if anyone can give a reason to acquit the accused.
If a witness says, “I can teach a reason to acquit him,” what do the judges do?
They silence him because witnesses cannot give arguments.
If a student says, “I can teach a reason to make him guilty,” what do the judges do?
They silence him because students cannot argue for guilt.
Why is a witness or a student not allowed to give a reason to make the accused guilty?
Because only judges can present reasons for guilt in a capital case.
