(Mishnah): When they finish the case, they bring [the litigants] in. The greatest judge says 'Ploni, you are Zakai. Almoni, you are obligated.'

Question: What is the source that when he leaves, [a judge] may not tell [Almoni] 'I acquitted you, but my colleagues obligated. What can I do? They outnumbered me!'

Answer: About this it says "Holech Rachil Megaleh Sod.''

(Gemara - R. Yochanan): We force [the judge who obligates] to write Zakai (like the majority).

(Reish Lakish): One who obligates writes Chayav, and one who is Mezakeh writes Zakai.

Question: Our Mishnah refutes Reish Lakish! What is the source that when he leaves, he may not say 'I acquitted you, but my colleagues obligated'? (If he writes Zakai, Almoni will see this!) How does Reish Lakish explain this?

Answer: [It is known that he was Mezakeh, but] one may not say "how much I wanted (insisted) to be Mezakeh Ploni in his Din, and they did not let me!''

Question: What is R. Yochanan's reason? (It looks false to write unlike he held!)

Answer: [The obligated party] should not bring someone else who holds like [Ploni, who said Zakai], and say "even Ploni was there [and was Mezakeh] - did even he err?!'' (Really, I am Zakai! Therefore, all write Chayav, so he cannot do so. We explained the Sugya like RIDVAZ.)

(Mishnah): Whenever [a litigant] brings a proof, he cancels the verdict.

If they told him "bring all your proofs from now and until 30 days'', if he brought within 30 days, he cancels the verdict; after 30 days, he does not cancel the verdict;

R. Shimon ben Gamliel says, what should he do? He did not find within 30, and he found after 30! (Therefore, he cancels the verdict.)

(Gemara - R. Oshayah): There (in capital cases), it is possible to add judges [until 71. Therefore, when one is undecided, we add two] and they debate with each other. Here, we cannot add [until 71. Therefore, when one is undecided, we add one - Ridvaz].

(R. Yochanan and Reish Lakish): Even here, it is possible to add judges [until 71. Therefore, when one is undecided, we add one].

(Mishnah): If they told him "bring witnesses'', and he said that he does not have witnesses; "bring a proof'', and he said that he does not have a proof, and afterwards he found witnesses or a proof, it has no effect;

R. Shimon ben Gamliel says, what should he do? He did not know that he has witnesses, and he found witnesses! He did not know that he has a proof, and he found a proof!

If they told him "bring witnesses'', and he said that he does not have witnesses; "bring a proof'', and he said that he does not have a proof, and he saw that he would be obligated, and said 'Ploni and Almoni, come to testify for me!', or he pulled a proof out of his belt, it has no effect.

(Gemara - R. Yochanan citing R. Hoshayah): Three Amora'im - one of them said that whenever he brings a proof, he cancels the verdict. One said that if he brought within 30 days, he cancels the verdict; after 30 days, he does not cancel the verdict. And one said that he never cancels the verdict, unless he brings a proof that he did not know about at all.

Question (Mishnah - R. Shimon ben Gamliel): What should he do? He did not know that he has witnesses, and he found witnesses! He did not know that he has a proof, and he found a proof! (This is difficult for the one who says that he cancels only within 30 days.)

R. Lo and R. Zeira [argued about until when he may bring a proof that he did not know about at all] - one of them said until he is Mevatel his proofs, and one said until he denies his proofs (says that he has no other proofs).

R. Levi had a Din with a man about houses. They were judged in front of R. Lazar. After the final verdict, [one of them] brought a proof. [R. Lazar] asked R. Yochanan; he told him "whenever he brings a proof, he cancels the verdict.''

R. Avamchis had a Din with a man about a millstone. They were judged in front of R. Lazar. After the final verdict, [one of them] brought witnesses. [R. Lazar] asked R. Yochanan; he said to him "you still [need to ask] this? [I already told you that] whenever he brings a proof, he cancels the verdict!''

Question: Why [did R. Lazar need to ask about] two episodes?

Answer: [In the case of] R. Levi, the final verdict was not carried out. [In the case of] R. Avamchis, the final verdict was carried out.

Question: A validation of judges (they signed that they affirmed the validity of the signatures on a document - if we do not recognize the signatures of the witnesses, nor of the judges), does it need Beis Din [to verify the signatures of the witnesses or of the judges? Or, are we not concerned for forgery in such a case?]

Answer: R. Hoshayah in the name of Shmuel, and R. Banai in the name of Shmuel [argued about this] - one of them said, they must verify the signatures of the witnesses or of the judges. And one said that they may verify the signatures of one witness and one judge.