1)

(a)Regarding Dinei Mamonos - each litigant initially picks one Dayan (See Tos. Yom-Tov).

(b)The advantage of doing this is - that the litigants, thinking that the Dayan that he picked will do his best to litigate in his favor, will be more prepared to accept the Beis-Din's ruling (See Tos. Yom-Tov).

2)

(a)According to Rebbi Meir, the two litigants between them choose the third Dayan. The advantage of doing that is - the will work harder to work on behalf of both litigants.

(b)The Chachamim say - that it is the two Dayanim whom the litigants chose who picks the third Dayan...

(c)... since that will deter him from working on behalf of either of the litigants (See also Tos. Yom-Tov).

(d)The Halachah is like - the Chachamim.

3)

(a)Rebbi Meir holds that one litigant has the right to reject the Dayan that the other litigant chooses (See Tos. Yom-Tov). According to the Chachamim - he may only do so if he can prove that he is a relative (See Tos. Yom-Tov) or is otherwise Pasul.

(b)When they say that he cannot disqualify them ...

1. ... 'Im heim Kesheirim', he means if they are neither relatives nor Pasul, in which case ...

2. ... 'O Mumchin' - they are considered experts (even if they are 'Yoshvei K'ranos' [people who sit around and do nothing]).

(c)Assuming the handpicked judges are not experts, if one of the litigants rejects their ruling on the grounds that they are incompetent - his claim is rejected.

4)

(a)If the current Beis'Din's P'sak clashes with a clear ruling mentioned in the Mishnah or the Gemara (she'Ta'ah bi'Devar Mishnah) - their Din is overturned.

(b)If it clashes with an opinion mentioned there, whose opinion is not generally accepted (she'Ta'ah be'Shikul ha'Da'as) ...

1. ... his ruling is rejected - provided he did not actually take the money from the one and hand it to the other.

2. ... his ruling stands - if he take the money from the one and hand it to the other

(c)In the former case, if the litigant who received the money has gone overseas and it is impossible to get the money back - the judge is not obligated to pay out of his own pocket (since he had no intention of causing damage [See Tos. Yom-Tov 'Eino Yachol Leposlan', who elaborates on all the rulings currently under discussion).

(d)In the latter case, the judges are obligated to pay out of their pocket - if the money cannot be retrieved, as we explained in the previous case).

5)

(a)The rulings of an inexpert judge whom the litigants did not accept - are automatically invalidated ...

(b)... even if he received a mandate from the head of the Golah to litigate.

(c)There are three definitions of such a judge: one is that he is self-appointed, another that the king appointed him to judge and the third - where some of the elders of the community appointed him.

(d)A Ba'al Zero'a (who rules or judges by force) - is the title that the Chachamim confer upon the judge under discussion.

6)

(a)If such a judge judged his case - each litigant has the right to - overturn the case and have it re-judged by an expert Beis-Din.

(b)If the event that he erred without actually taking the money from the one and handing it to the other, and it is not possible to get the money back - then he is obligated to pay from his own pocket (like a person who causes damage).

(c)If, on the other hand, he did take the money from the one and hand it to the other - then he is Chayav to pay from his own pocket immediately, and claim the money back from the litigant who received it.

(d)If however, they accepted an expert Dayan who is known as a 'Mumcheh le'Rabim' or if he received a mandate from the head of the Galus to judge - then come what may, he is not obligated to pay out of his own pocket.

7)

(a)Irrespective of whether a Mumcheh received a mandate to judge from the head of the Golah or from the Nasi in Eretz Yisrael, he is permitted to litigate against the will of the litigants. The difference between them however is - that the former may do so either in Bavel or in Eretz Yisreal, the latter may do so only in Eretz Yisrael.

(b)The title of someone who has studied both the written and the oral Toros and knows how to explain them and to derive one thing from the other is - a 'Mumcheh'.

(c)A 'Mumcheh le'Rabim' is - one that has become renowned for his knowledge.

(d)The advantages the latter have over the former are - a. that he is permitted to litigate on his own (without a Beis-Din), and b. that he does not require a mandate from the head of the Galus to litigate by force.

8)

(a)According to Rebbi Meir, each litigant has the right to disqualify the other litigant's witnesses. The Chachamim - maintain that he does not.

(b)The case is - where Reuven claims that he has two pairs of witnesses, and when he brings the first pair, Shimon teams up with a second witness, who claims that they are either relatives or Pasul.

(c)On what grounds does Rebbi Meir authorizes Shimon to do so - because, since Reuven has another pair of witnesses, Shimon is not prejudiced.

(d)The Chachamim disagree - because a litigant has the right to retract from his initial claim that he has two pairs of witnesses (in which case Shimon is prejudiced).

(e)The Halachah is - like the Chachamim.

9)

(a)We learn from the Pasuk in Ki Seitzei "Lo Yumsu Avos al Banim" - that close relatives are not eligible to litigate on one's behalf (whether for or against).

(b)The Mishnah now discusses a case where Reuven declares that he accepts either his or Shimon's father or three cowhands - who are not eligible either, to litigate ([See Tos. Yom-Tov]), though they are not Pasul to testify (See Tos. Yom-Tov).

(c)Rebbi Meir - permits him to retract ...

(d)... even after the Beis-Din have issued its final ruling ...

(e)... and declared 'Ish P'loni Atah Zakai ... !' (See Tos. Yom-Tov).

10)

(a)According to the Chachamim - once the Beis-Din have issued their final ruling, Reuven can no longer retract.

(b)The Halachah is - like the Chachamim ...

(c)If they clinch the deal with a Kinyan (even before Beis-Din have issued the ruling) - he cannot retract either (See Tos. Yom-Tov).

11)

(a)If defendant is Chayav to swear and agrees to pay the claimant should he swear (See Tos. Yom-Tov), Rebbi Meir permits him to retract - and certainly if the claimant agrees to drop his claim if the defendant agrees to swear and then changes his mind.

(b)According to the Chachamim - once he has made the Neder or if they affected a Kinyan, he can no longer retract.

(c)The Halachah is - like the Chachamim.

12)

(a)The Mishnah now lists some of the P'sulin (See Tos. Yom-Tov) - both to judge and to testify.

(b)The Tana disqualifies a gambler - because he does not do anything constructive.

(c)In order to be eligible, one must indulge either in Torah and Gemilus Chasadim - or in business or a trade, or some other occupation from which others benefit.

13)

(a)Rebbi Yehudah (later in the Mishnah) qualifies the P'sul of gambling - by confining it to where one has no other occupation ...

(b)... and that is the Halachah.

(c)In order to regain one's eligibility to testify and judge - one must break one's dice and undertake not to revert to gambling even not for gain.

(d)'Malveh be'Ribis' incorporates - both those who lend on interest and those who borrow on interest ...

(e)... seeing as both transgress a La'v (See Tos. Yom-Tov).

14)

(a)Other that pigeon-racing (See Tos. Yom-Tov), 'Mafrichei Yonim might mean - people who train their own pigeons to lure pigeons from dove-cots belonging to others ...

(b)... which falls under the category of Gezel because of Darkei Shalom (which is mi'de'Rabbanan [Ibid.]).

(c)Based on the Pasuk in B'har "Vehaysah ha'Aretz lachem le'Ochlah", Sochrei Shevi'is are Pasul - because they have transgressed the Asei of ("le'Ochlah", 've'Lo li'Sechorah').

(d)When Rebbi Shimon said ...

1. ... 'mi'Techilah Hayu Kor'in Osan 'Osfei Shevi'is', he meant - that initially, people who gathered the fruit of Sh'mitah for themselves were also Pasul le'Eidus.

2. ... 'mi'she'Rabu ha'Anasin, Chazru Lik'rosan Sochrei Shevi'is', he meant - that when the king's men began to come round collecting so many Kurin per annum on behalf of the king, the Chachmim ruled that only Sochrei Shevi'is were Pasul, but not Osfei Shei'is, since they were not gathering it for themselves, but to give to the king (See Tos. Yom-Tov).

15)

(a)The Bartenura lists the P'sulin not mentioned in the Mishnah: The two categories of people that are Pasul, based on the Pasuk in Mas'ei respectively " ... asher Hu Rasha Lamus", and on the Pasuk in Ki Seitzei "Vehayah im bin Hakos ha'Rasha" - are anybody who is Chayav Misah or Malkos (incorporating Kareis).

(b)We learn this from the Pasuk in Mishpatim "Al Tasheis Yadcha im Rasha Lih'yos Eid Chamas" - which we Darshen to mean that whoever is termed a 'Rasha' cannot be a witness.

(c)And from the Pasuk in Ki Seitaei "Veniklah Achicha le'Einecha" we learn - that once the Rasha has received Malkos, he is once again our brother and is therefore eligible to testify and judge.

(d)Whoever obtains money that is not his is Pasul min ha'Torah even though he is Chayav neither Misah nor Malkos ...

(e)... incorporating a Ganav, a Gazlan and Malvei be'Ribis (See Tos. Yom-Tov DH 've'Eilu hein ha'Pesulim').

16)

(a)Someone who takes money which is Asur mi'de'Rabbanan - is Pasul mi'de'Rabbanan.

(b)An example of this is 'Mafrichei Yonim' (which we discussed earlier in the Mishnah).

(c)A Chamsan who gives money - (i.e. someone who purchases an object against the owner's will) is Pasul mi'de'Rabbanan, too.

17)

(a)Gaba'im and tax-collectors who collect for themselves - are both Pasul mi'de'Rabbanan, as is ...

(b)... someone who publicly accepts gifts from Nochrim.

(c)The difference between P'sulim de'Rabanan and P'sulim d'Oraysa is - that whereas the former only become Pasul once they have been publicized and an announcement made disqualifying them, the latter are automatically disqualified.

(d)In order to regain their eligibility to testify and to judge, all these sinners - must do Teshuvah, return the money and do something positive to ensure that they will not repeat their sin.

18)

(a)The two relatives that head the Tana's list of Pasul relatives are - one's father (See Tos. Yom-Tov) and brother.

(b)After one's father's brother comes - one's mother's brother.

(c)The husbands of one's sister and of both one's paternal and maternal aunt are Pasul - because 'a man is like his wife' (See Tos. Yom-Tov [and vice-versa\).

(d)One's step-father, father-in-law and 'Gis' - the husband of his wife's sister, are Pasul too.

19)

(a)The Mishnah rules that the sons and the sons-in-law of the above - are Pasul too ...

(b)... but not the children that one's wife's sister's husband (See Tos. Yom-Tov) has from another wife.

(c)Chorgo - (one's stepson [See Tos. Yom-Tov]) alone is Pasul, but not his children ... .

(d)One is - not permitted to judge or to testify for or against any of the above.

(e)One may not testify or judge one's stepson's wife (for the reason that we gave (in 18c).

20)

(a)If brothers (both paternal and maternal) are considered 'Rishon be'Rishon' and their sons with one another - Sheini be'Sheini.

(b)Sh'lishi bi'Shelishi is - their grandsons with one another.

(c)A Shelishi be'Sheini is Kasher - and so is a Sh'lishi, be'Rishon.

(d)A Sheini be'Rishon is Pasul - and so is a Sheini be'Sheini.

(e)If one switches daughters for sons - the Din will be the same.

21)

(a)According to Rebbi Yossi, the current opinion is that of Rebbi Akiva. According to the Mishnah Rishonah - the list includes one's father's brother and his sons (See Tos. Yom-Tov).

(b)The principle that governs this ruling is that - whoever is fit to inherit a person is Pasul (to preclude his mother's family [See Tiferes Yisrael]).

(c)He is nevertheless Pasul from testifying or judging them - because although they do not inherit him, he inherits them.

22)

(a)For the P'sul to take affect, they must have been relatives - at the time that one of them witnessed the scene.

(b)An example of a relative whose kinship was already severed at that time - is a son-in-law, where one's daughter died earlier.

(c)According to Rebbi Yehudah - if they had a son, then the P'sul remains intact, even though his daughter is no longer alive.

(d)The Halachah is - like the Tana Kama.

23)

(a)Rebbi Yehudah (See Tos. Yom-Tov) declares Pasul ...

1. ... an 'Oheiv' - which the Tana defines as 'a Shushbin' (the best man at his wedding during the period of the Sheva B'rachos).

2. ... a 'Sonei' - someone to whom one has not spoken for three days due to dislike.

(b)The Chachamim maintain - that this is not sufficient grounds to suspect a person of testifying falsely (See Tos. Yom-Tov).

(c)The Halachah is - like the Chachamim ...

(d)... who agree - that they are Pasul with regard to judging ...

(e)... because - the one cannot find fault with his friend, whilst - the other, is incapable of finding any merits in his enemy's actions.

24)

(a)When the witnesses arrive in Beis-Din, the first thing the Dayanim do is - to frighten them by warning them that even those who hire false witnesses despise them and refer to them as Resha'im (See Tos. Yom-Tov).

(b)The Tana learns this - from Navos ha'Yizre'eli, where those who hired the false witnesses who testified against him, referred to them as 'b'nei Beliya'al' (men devoid of the yoke of Heaven).

(c)After clearing the courtroom (See Tos. Yom-Tov) - they begin to cross-examine the older witness, the only person left in Beis-Din (See Tos. Yom-Tov).

25)

(a)In a case of a monetary claim, the first question they ask him is - 'How do you know that Reuven owes Shimon money?'

(b)If he replies that the debtor or some other important man (See Tos/ Yom-Tov) told him, Beis-Din ignore his testimony ...

(c)... even in the former case - seeing as people sometimes claim that they borrowed money in order not to give the appearance of being wealthy.

(d)His testimony will be accepted, however - if he replies that, in their presence, Reuven admitted to Shimon that he owed him two hundred Zuz.

26)

(a)When they have finished cross-examining the first witness - Beis-Din examine the second witness.

(b)If, after their testimonies are found to be consistent, and following the Beis-Din's deliberations, two Dayanim consider Reuven Patur, and one, Chayav - he is Patur (See Tos. Yom-Tov).

(c)If ...

1. ... one Dayan considers him Patur and two, Chayav - he is Chayav (See Tos. Yom-Tov), whereas if ...

2. ... one Dayan considers him Patur and one, Chayav, and the other one doesn't know, or even if ...

3. ... two Dayanim consider him either Chayav or Patur and the other one doesn't know - they add two Dayanim, and continue the deliberations (See Tos. Yom-Tov).

(d)The reason that, if the third Dayan says he doesn't know, it is worse than if he would have disagreed with his two colleagues is - because if a Dayan doesn't know, it is considered as if only two Dayanim have Paskened, and not three (and three are required to Pasken).

27)

(a)After the litigants have stated their respective cases (whilst the deliberations are taking place) - they wait outside until Beis-Din arrives at a conclusion (See Tos. Yom-Tov).

(b)When they bring in the two litigants (See Tos. Yom-Tov), the senior Dayan (See Tos. Yom-Tov) announces the P'sak-Din ...

(c)... 'Ish P'loni Atah Zakai; Ish P'loni Atah Chayav!'

(d)Upon leaving Beis-Din, a Dayan is not allowed to inform the guilty party that he considered him innocent, and that it was his colleagues who overruled him.

(e)The Tana learns ...

1. ... it from the Pasuk in Kedoshim "Lo Seilech Rachil be'Amecha".

2. ... from the Pasuk in Mishlei "Holech Rachil Megaleh Sod" that the La'v extends to a Dayan (See Tos. Yom-Tov).

28)

(a)A litigant can overturn Beis-Din's ruling (See Tos. Yom-Tov) - as long as brings fresh proof to support his initial argument (See Tiferes Yisrael).

(b)In a case where Beis-Din grant him thirty days to bring all his proofs and he brings them after that, the Tana Kama rules - that they are not accepted.

(c)Raban Shimon ben Gamliel says - why should he be penalized for not managing to find the proofs earlier (See Tos. Yom-Tov)?

29)

(a)The Tana Kama rules that if a litigant claims that he has no witnesses or that he has no proof, and he later turns up with witnesses or proof - they are not accepted.

(b)Here too, Raban Shimon ben Gamliel argues - that a person ought not to be penalized for finding witnesses or proof of which he was not previously aware.

(c)The Halachah is - like the Tana Kama (Ibid.).

30)

(a)In a case where the litigant claims that he has no witnesses or proof, and when he sees that Beis-Din are about to declare him Chayav, he calls for 'P'loni and P'loni' to come and testify, Raban Shimon ben Gamliel - concedes that Beis-Din ignore his latter claim ...

(b)... and the same applies where he suddenly pulls out proof from his money belt ...

(c)... since, in these cases, it is obvious that he is lying.

31)

(a)In the event that the litigant claims that he has witnesses or a proof overseas, and asks Beis-Din to give him time to fetch them - Beis-Din proceed with the Din according to the witnesses and proof that is currently available ...

(b)... and should the litigant later bring them, they re-judge the case.