acquitted

and taking into consideration their constancy and fidelity toward us and toward our ancestors, we have, as we ought, acquitted them of every sort of charge.

BEHOLD I have told you all things, that I may be acquitted of your sin.

And the king said, Hast thou heard what the conjurors have spoken? Now tell me truly, how didst thou; and if thou shalt speak truth thou shalt be acquitted.

But he came near, and lifted up his hands to heaven, and cried out with a loud voice, in order to be heard by the whole multitude, and said, "O Lord of the creatures that are in the heaven, in the earth, and in the sea; for thou art the most authentic witness to what I have done, that it has all been done by thy appointment, and that it was thou that affordedst us assistance when we attempted any thing, and showedst mercy on the Hebrews in all their distresses; do thou come now, and hear all that I say, for no action or thought escapes thy knowledge; so that thou wilt not disdain to speak what is true, for my vindication, without any regard to the ungrateful imputations of these men. As for what was done before I was born, thou knowest best, as not learning them by report, but seeing them, and being present with them when they were done; but for what has been done of late, and which these men, although they know them well enough, unjustly pretend to suspect, be thou my witness. When I lived a private quiet life, I left those good things which, by my own diligence, and by thy counsel, I enjoyed with Raguel my father-in-law; and I gave myself up to this people, and underwent many miseries on their account. I also bore great labors at first, in order to obtain liberty for them, and now in order to their preservation; and have always showed myself ready to assist them in every distress of theirs. Now, therefore, since I am suspected by those very men whose being is owing to my labors, come thou, as it is reasonable to hope thou wilt; thou, I say, who showedst me that fire at mount Sinai, and madest me to hear its voice, and to see the several wonders which that place afforded thou who commandedst me to go to Egypt, and declare thy will to this people; thou who disturbest the happy estate of the Egyptians, and gavest us the opportunity of flying away from out under them, and madest the dominion of Pharaoh inferior to my dominion; thou who didst make the sea dry land for us, when we knew not whither to go, and didst overwhelm the Egyptians with those destructive waves which had been divided for us; thou who didst bestow upon us the security of weapons when we were naked; thou who didst make the fountains that were corrupted to flow, so as to be fit for drinking, and didst furnish us with water that came out of the rocks, when we were in want of it; thou who didst preserve our lives with [quails, which was] food from the sea, when the fruits of the ground failed us; thou didst send us such food from heaven as had never been seen before; thou who didst suggest to us the knowledge of thy laws, and appoint to us a form of government,—come thou, I say, O Lord of the whole world, and that as such a Judge and a Witness to me as cannot be bribed, and show how I never admitted of any gift against justice from any of the Hebrews; and have never condemned a man that ought to have been acquitted, on account of one that was rich; and have never attempted to hurt this commonwealth. I am now and am suspected of a thing the remotest from my intentions, as if I had given the preisthood to Aaron, not at thy command, but out own favor to him; do thou at this time demonstrate that all things are administered by thy providence and that nothing happens by chance, but is governed by thy will, and thereby attains its end: as also demonstrate that thou takest care that have done good to the Hebrews; demonstrate this, I say, by the punishment of Abiram and Dathan, who condemn thee as an insensible Being, and one overcome by my contrivances. This thou do by inflicting such an open punishment on these men who so madly fly in the face of thy glory, as will take them out of the world, not in an manner, but so that it may appear they do die after the manner of other men: let that ground which they tread upon open about them and consume them, with their families and goods. This will be a demonstration of thy power to all and this method of their sufferings will be an instruction of wisdom for those that entertain profane sentiments of thee. By this means I shall be a good servant, in the precepts thou hast given by me. But if the calumnies they have raised against me be true, mayst thou preserve these men from every evil accident, and bring all that destruction on me which I have imprecated upon them. And when thou hast inflicted punishment on those that have endeavored to deal unjustly with this people, bestow upon them concord and peace. Save this multitude that follow thy commandments, and preserve them free from harm, and let them not partake of the punishment of those that have sinned; for thou knowest thyself it is not just, that for the wickedness of those men the whole body of the Israelites should suffer punishment."

"Marcus Antonius, imperator, to Hyrcanus the high priest and ethnarch of the Jews, sendeth greeting. It you be in health, it is well; I am also in health, with the army. Lysimachus, the son of Pausanias, and Josephus, the son of Menneus, and Alexander, the son of Theodorus, your ambassadors, met me at Ephesus, and have renewed the embassage which they had formerly been upon at Rome, and have diligently acquitted themselves of the present embassage, which thou and thy nation have intrusted to them, and have fully declared the goodwill thou hast for us. I am therefore satisfied, both by your actions and your words, that you are well-disposed to us; and I understand that your conduct of life is constant and religious: so I reckon upon you as our own. But when those that were adversaries to you, and to the Roman people, abstained neither from cities nor temples, and did not observe the agreement they had confirmed by oath, it was not only on account of our contest with them, but on account of all mankind in common, that we have taken vengeance on those who have been the authors of great injustice towards men, and of great wickedness towards the gods; for the sake of which we suppose it was that the sun turned away his light from us, as unwilling to view the horrid crime they were guilty of in the case of Cæsar. We have also overcome their conspiracies, which threatened the gods themselves, which Macedonia received, as it is a climate peculiarly proper for impious and insolent attempts; and we have overcome that confused rout of men, half mad with spite against us, which they got together at Philippi in Macedonia, when they seized on the places that were proper for their purpose, and, as it were, walled them round with mountains to the very sea, and where the passage was open only through a single gate. This victory we gained, because the gods had condemned those men for their wicked enterprises. Now Brutus, when he had fled as far as Philippi, was shut up by us, and became a partaker of the same perdition with Cassius; and now these have received their punishment, we suppose that we may enjoy peace for the time to come, and that Asia may be at rest from war. We therefore make that peace which God hath given us common to our confederates also, insomuch that the body of Asia is now recovered out of that distemper it was under by the means of our victory. I, therefore, bearing in mind both thee and your nation, shall take care of what may be for your advantage. I have also sent epistles in writing to the several cities, that if any persons, whether free-men or bond-men, have been sold under the spear by Caius Cassius, or his subordinate officers, they may be set free. And I will that you kindly make use of the favors which I and Dolabella have granted you. I also forbid the Tyrians to use any violence with you; and for what places of the Jews they now possess, I order them to restore them. I have withal accepted of the crown which thou sentest me."

Now Hyrcanus was, by degrees, inflamed with these discourses, and at length could bear no longer, but he summoned Herod to take his trial. Accordingly, by his father's advice, and as soon as the affairs of Galilee would give him leave, he came up to [Jerusalem], when he had first placed garrisons in Galilee; however, he came with a sufficient body of soldiers, so many indeed that he might not appear to have with him an army able to overthrow Hyrcanus's government, nor yet so few as to expose him to the insults of those that envied him. However, Sextus Caesar was in fear for the young man, lest he should be taken by his enemies, and brought to punishment; so he sent some to denounce expressly to Hyrcanus that he should acquit Herod of the capital charge against him; who acquitted him accordingly, as being otherwise inclined also so to do, for he loved Herod.

Nor was he mistaken in the conjecture he made; for Herod got his army together, out of the anger he bare him for his threatening him with the accusation in a public court, and led it to Jerusalem, in order to throw Hyrcanus down from his kingdom; and this he had soon done, unless his father and brother had gone out together and broken the force of his fury, and this by exhorting him to carry his revenge no further than to threatening and affrighting, but to spare the king, under whom he had been advanced to such a degree of power; and that he ought not to be so much provoked at his being tried, as to forget to be thankful that he was acquitted; nor so long to think upon what was of a melancholy nature, as to be ungrateful for his deliverance; and if we ought to reckon that God is the arbitrator of success in war, an unjust cause is of more disadvantage than an army can be of advantage; and that therefore he ought not to be entirely confident of success in a case where he is to fight against his king, his supporter, and one that had often been his benefactor, and that had never been severe to him, any otherwise than as he had hearkened to evil counselors, and this no further than by bringing a shadow of injustice upon him. So Herod was prevailed upon by these arguments, and supposed that what he had already done was sufficient for his future hopes, and that he had enough shown his power to the nation.

But if the proofs which we have adduced do not appear full enough, and the similitude of the apostle seem wanting in applicability, let us add the voice of prophetic authority, and see what the prophets declare regarding those who at first, indeed, leading a righteous life, have deserved to receive numerous proofs of the goodness of God, but afterwards, as being human beings, have fallen astray, with whom the prophet, making himself also one, says: “Why, O Lord, hast Thou made us to err from Thy way? and hardened our heart, that we should not fear Thy name? Return, for Thy servants’ sake, for the tribes of Thine inheritance, that we also for a little may obtain some inheritance from Thy holy hill.” Jeremiah also employs similar language: “O Lord, Thou hast deceived us, and we were deceived; Thou hast held [us], and Thou hast prevailed.” The expression, then, “Why, O Lord, hast Thou hardened our heart, that we should not fear Thy name?” used by those who prayed for mercy, is to be taken in a figurative, moral acceptation, as if one were to say, “Why hast Thou spared us so long, and didst not requite us when we sinned, but didst abandon us, that so our wickedness might increase, and our liberty of sinning be extended when punishment ceased?” In like manner, unless a horse continually feel the spur of his rider, and have his mouth abraded by a bit, he becomes hardened. And a boy also, unless constantly disciplined by chastisement, will grow up to be an insolent youth, and one ready to fall headlong into vice. God accordingly abandons and neglects those whom He has judged undeserving of chastisement: “For whom the Lord loveth He chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom He receiveth.” From which we are to suppose that those are to be received into the rank and affection of sons, who have deserved to be scourged and chastened by the Lord, in order that they also, through endurance of trials and tribulations, may be able to say, “Who shall separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus? shall tribulation, or anguish, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?” For by all these is each one’s resolution manifested and displayed, and the firmness of his perseverance made known, not so much to God, who knows all things before they happen, as to the rational and heavenly virtues, who have obtained a part in the work of procuring human salvation, as being a sort of assistants and ministers to God. Those, on the other hand, who do not yet offer themselves to God with such constancy and affection, and are not ready to come into His service, and to prepare their souls for trial, are said to be abandoned by God, i.e. not to be instructed, inasmuch as they are not prepared for instruction, their training or care being undoubtedly postponed to a later time. These certainly do not know what they will obtain from God, unless they first entertain the desire of being benefited; and this finally will be the case, if a man come first to a knowledge of himself, and feel what are his defects, and understand from whom he either ought or can seek the supply of his deficiencies. For he who does not know beforehand of his weakness or his sickness, cannot seek a physician; or at least, after recovering his health, that man will not be grateful to his physician who did not first recognise the dangerous nature of his ailment. And so, unless a man has first ascertained the defects of his life, and the evil nature of his sins, and made this known by confession from his own lips, he cannot be cleansed or acquitted, lest he should be ignorant that what he possesses has been bestowed on him by favour, but should consider as his own property what flows from the divine liberality, which idea undoubtedly generates arrogance of mind and pride, and finally becomes the cause of the individual’s ruin. And this, we must believe, was the case with the devil, who viewed as his own, and not as given him by God, the primacy which he held at the time when he was unstained; and thus was fulfilled in him the declaration, that “every one who exalteth himself shall be abased.” From which it appears to me that the divine mysteries were concealed from the wise and prudent, according to the statement of Scripture, that “no flesh should glory before God,” and revealed to children—to those, namely, who, after they have become infants and little children, i.e. have returned to the humility and simplicity of children, then make progress; and on arriving at perfection, remember that they have obtained their state of happiness, not by their own merits, but by the grace and compassion of God.

If they find him not guilty, he is discharged, if not, it [the trial] is adjourned till the following day. During this time they [the judges] go about in pairs, practice moderation in food, drink no wine the whole day, and discuss the case throughout the night. Early next morning they reassemble in court. He who is in favor of acquittal states, ‘I declare him innocent and I stand by my opinion.’ While he who is in favor of condemnation says: ‘I declare him guilty and stand by my opinion.’ One who [previously] argued for conviction may now argue for acquittal, but one who [previously] argued for acquittal may not now argue for conviction. If they have made any mistake, the two judges’ scribes are to remind them. If they find him not guilty, they discharge him. If not, they take a vote. If twelve acquit and eleven condemn, he is acquitted. If twelve condemn and eleven acquit, or if eleven condemn and eleven acquit and one says, ‘I do not know,’ or even if twenty-two acquit or condemn and a single one says, ‘I do not know,’ they add to the judges. Up to what number is the court increased? By twos up to the limit of seventy-one. If thirty-six acquit and thirty-five condemn, he is acquitted. But if thirty-six condemn and thirty-five acquit, the two sides debate the case together until one of those who condemn agrees with the view of those who are for acquittal.

If they find him not guilty, he is discharged, if not, it [the trial] is adjourned till the following day. During this time they [the judges] go about in pairs, practice moderation in food, drink no wine the whole day, and discuss the case throughout the night. Early next morning they reassemble in court. He who is in favor of acquittal states, ‘I declare him innocent and I stand by my opinion.’ While he who is in favor of condemnation says: ‘I declare him guilty and stand by my opinion.’ One who [previously] argued for conviction may now argue for acquittal, but one who [previously] argued for acquittal may not now argue for conviction. If they have made any mistake, the two judges’ scribes are to remind them. If they find him not guilty, they discharge him. If not, they take a vote. If twelve acquit and eleven condemn, he is acquitted. If twelve condemn and eleven acquit, or if eleven condemn and eleven acquit and one says, ‘I do not know,’ or even if twenty-two acquit or condemn and a single one says, ‘I do not know,’ they add to the judges. Up to what number is the court increased? By twos up to the limit of seventy-one. If thirty-six acquit and thirty-five condemn, he is acquitted. But if thirty-six condemn and thirty-five acquit, the two sides debate the case together until one of those who condemn agrees with the view of those who are for acquittal.

Rabbi Yose bar Judah says: “Initially a slayer is sent in advance to [one of] the cities of refuge, whether he had slain in error or with intent and then the court sends and brings him out. Whoever was found guilty of a capital crime the court had executed, and whoever was found not guilty of a capital crime they acquitted. Whoever was found liable to banishment they restored to his place [of refuge] as it says, “And the congregation shall restore him to the city of refuge to which he fled” (Numbers 35:25). All the same are [the deaths of] the high priest who had been anointed with the anointing oil; or had worn many garments, or had retired from his office all make possible the return of the manslayer. Rabbi Judah says also the [death of the] priest who had been anointed for war makes possible the return of the manslayer. Therefore, mothers of high priests would provide food and clothing for them [who had been exiled] that they might not pray for their son’s death. If the high priest died at the conclusion of the trial, the slayer does not go into banishment. If he died before the trial was concluded and another high priest was appointed in his stead and the trial was then concluded, the slayer returns [home from refuge only] after the latter’s death.

Rebbi Simeon ben Ioḥai was hidden in a cave for thirteen years, in a carob cave, until his body was covered with rust. At the end of thirteen years he said, should I not go out and see what voice is in the world? He went and sat at the entrance to the cave. He saw a catcher out to catch birds spreading out his net. He heard a heavenly voice saying “acquitted”, and [the bird] was saved. He said, no bird will be adjudicated without Heaven, so much less a human. When he saw that words of intercession were given, he said, let us go down and warm ourselves in the public baths of Tiberias. He said, we need to do something like our forefathers (Gen. 33:18): “He graced the entrance to the city,” they were putting up duty free shops and selling at wholesale prices. He said, let us purify Tiberias. He took lupines, cut them up and threw them down in irregular fashion. Where there was a corpse it was floating and came to the surface. A Samaritan saw him and said, should I not make fun of this old Jew? He took a corpse, went, and buried it at a purified place. He came to Rebbi Simeon bar Ioḥai and said to him, did you not purify place X? Come, and I shall take out [a corpse] from there! Rebbi Simeon bar Ioḥai saw by the Holy Spirit that he had put it there. He said, I decree that the upper ones shall go down and the lower ones come up. So it happenend to him. When he passed by Magdala, he heard the voice of the scribe who said, so bar Ioḥai purifies Tiberias? He said, it should come upon me if I did not hear that Tiberias once will be purified. Even so, you did not believe me! Immediately he turned into a bone heap.

Rav Ḥuna said, when the slain of Bettar were permitted to be buried, “the good and the benefactor” was fixed. “The good” that they did not decompose, “the benefactor” that they were permitted for burial. It was stated, Rebbi Yose said, 52 years Bettar existed after the destruction of the Temple. And why was it destroyed? For they lit lights after the destruction of the Temple. Why did they light lights? Because the council members of Jerusalem were dominating the center of the city. When they were seeing a person moving to Jerusalem they said to him, since we heard about you that you are aspiring to be made judge or councillor; he would say to them, that is not my intention. Because we heard about you that you intend to sell your property; he would say to them, that is not my intention. His colleague would say to him, what are you arguing with this one, write and I shall sign. He would write and his colleague would sign. They would send the sale document to his house companion and told him, if X comes to enter his property, do not let him, because it is sold to us. When he heard this from them he said, if only this man’s leg had been broken before he came to Jerusalem. That is what is written, they caught our steps, not to walk in our streets. They caught our steps, destroy the way to that House, our end is near, the end of this House is near, our days are fulfilled, the days of this House are fulfilled. They also did not come out well, he who enjoys disaster will not be acquitted.

HALAKHAH: “I shall be a nazir and obligate myself to shave a nazir,” etc. This “I also”, what do you subsume under it? Does “I also” refer to the entire sentence, or does “I also” only refer to part of the sentence? If “I also” refers to the entire sentence, he says “I also am a nazir.” If “I also” only refers to part of the sentence, he said “I am a nazir.” It was stated in the House of Rebbi: “ ‘I also’ refers to the entire sentence.” Rebbi Yose said, this implies that if some person said, I am a nazir for 100 days, and another person heard him and said, “I also”; the first one is a nazir for 100 days, the other is a nazir for 30 days unless he says, “I am like him, I am the same as he is.” Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: “I am obligated to shave half [a nazir]. Then he said, I am a nazir. If he shaved after 30 days he has fulfilled his obligation.” Rebbi Yose said, the Mishnah implies this: “ ‘I shall be a nazir and obligate myself to shave a nazir,’ if another heard him and said: ‘I also shall be and I obligate myself to shave another nazir,’ if they are clever, they will shave one another.” But not themselves. Because he said, “I shall be a nazir and obligate myself to shave a nazir”. But if he said, “I obligate myself to shave half a nazir” and then he said, “I shall be a nazir,” if he shaved himself he has acquitted himself of his obligation. One understands that the second one can shave the first, but can the first shave the second? Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Ze‘ira: This means that a person can take upon himself the sacrifice of a nazir who only in the future will make his vow. Rebbi Ḥinena in the name of Rebbi Ze‘ira inferred three [statements]: It implies that if he shaved himself he acquitted himself. It implies that a person obligates himself for another’s nezirut sacrifices of a future vow. It implies that a person chooses another’s nezirut sacrifices without the other’s knowledge. But he cannot dedicate [the animals] without the other’s knowledge.

HALAKHAH: “I shall be a nazir and obligate myself to shave a nazir,” etc. This “I also”, what do you subsume under it? Does “I also” refer to the entire sentence, or does “I also” only refer to part of the sentence? If “I also” refers to the entire sentence, he says “I also am a nazir.” If “I also” only refers to part of the sentence, he said “I am a nazir.” It was stated in the House of Rebbi: “ ‘I also’ refers to the entire sentence.” Rebbi Yose said, this implies that if some person said, I am a nazir for 100 days, and another person heard him and said, “I also”; the first one is a nazir for 100 days, the other is a nazir for 30 days unless he says, “I am like him, I am the same as he is.” Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: “I am obligated to shave half [a nazir]. Then he said, I am a nazir. If he shaved after 30 days he has fulfilled his obligation.” Rebbi Yose said, the Mishnah implies this: “ ‘I shall be a nazir and obligate myself to shave a nazir,’ if another heard him and said: ‘I also shall be and I obligate myself to shave another nazir,’ if they are clever, they will shave one another.” But not themselves. Because he said, “I shall be a nazir and obligate myself to shave a nazir”. But if he said, “I obligate myself to shave half a nazir” and then he said, “I shall be a nazir,” if he shaved himself he has acquitted himself of his obligation. One understands that the second one can shave the first, but can the first shave the second? Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Ze‘ira: This means that a person can take upon himself the sacrifice of a nazir who only in the future will make his vow. Rebbi Ḥinena in the name of Rebbi Ze‘ira inferred three [statements]: It implies that if he shaved himself he acquitted himself. It implies that a person obligates himself for another’s nezirut sacrifices of a future vow. It implies that a person chooses another’s nezirut sacrifices without the other’s knowledge. But he cannot dedicate [the animals] without the other’s knowledge.

There, we have stated: “Three categories of people shave and their shaving is a commandment: the nazir, the sufferer from skin disease, and the Levites. All these, if they shaved not with a knife or left two hairs,did not do anything.” Rebbi Eleazar said: The Mishnah [speaks] about an impure nazir. But a pure nazir, once he shaved most of his head, even if not with a knife, has acquitted himself [of his obligation]. Rebbi Immi, following Rebbi Eleazar (ben Azariah), asked: The only place where a knife is mentioned is about a pure nazir: “A shaving knife shall not pass over his head until the days are fulfilled.” Therefore, after he fulfilled them he needs a knife! Perhaps it was said only about an impure nazir with regard to two hairs. Rebbi Yose said to Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa: Do you remember when we were studying Nazir, we said that there was no difference between scissors and a knife, and Rebbi Eleazar said: The Mishnah [speaks] about an impure nazir! Why not about a pure nazir? The pure nazir shaves after the blood was sprinkled. When that was sanctified, his vow was completed. But it is as if fallen out.

MISHNAH: The same applies for preliminary marriages and for [liquidation of] debts. If he said to him, throw to me what you owe me and he threw it close to the lender, the borrower is acquitted, close to the borrower, the borrower remains obligated, in the middle both of them must share it. If she was standing on top of her roof and he threw it to her, as soon as it reached the roof’s airspace she is divorced. If he was on top and she below, once it left the domain of the roof she is divorced even if it was blotted out or burned.

Samuel said, if two men acted as judges, their judgment stands, but they are called an insolent court. Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish both are instructing: Even if two men acted as judges, their judgment is no judgment. There, we have stated: “If he rendered judgment, acquitted the guilty and condemned the innocent, declared the pure impure or the impure pure, what he did is done but he has to pay from his own pocket.” Rebbi Abba in the name of Rebbi Abbahu: if they told him, we accept you as if you were two. What are we dealing with? If his error was that he judged them on his discretion, then what he did is done. If his error was that he judged them by Torah law, why should he pay from his own pocket? Rebbi Abba in the name of Rebbi Abbahu: if they told him, we accept you as if you were three on condition that you judge us by Torah law. He erred and judged them on his discretion. What he did is done, but since he erred and judged them on his discretion, he has to pay from his own pocket because he was presumptuous to judge alone by Torah law, as we have stated: “Do not judge sitting alone, for only One judges sitting alone.”

“From where that one adds another three, etc. It was stated: Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel said, in earlier times the ketubah of qualified women was signed only by priests, Levites, or Israel whose daughters were qualified to marry into the priesthood. Rebbi Yose said, in earlier times there was no disagreement in Israel but the Synhedrion of 71 members were sitting in the free-stone hall; two courts of three members each were sitting, one in the glacis and one on the Temple Mount; and a court of 23 was sitting in every town of the Land of Israel. If somebody had a question of religious practice, he went and asked it from the court in his town. If they had heard [the answer], they told him; otherwise he and their distinguished member went and asked a court in their neighborhood. If these had heard [the answer], they told him; otherwise he and their distinguished member went and asked from the court on the Temple Mount. If these had heard [the answer], they told him; otherwise he and their distinguished member went and asked from the court on the glacis. If these had heard [the answer], they told him; otherwise they together entered the High Court in the free-stone hall since from there instruction came accepted in all of Israel, as it is said: From this place which the Eternal will choose. Even though the Synhedrion in the free-stone hall had 71 members, those present never numbered less than 23. If one of them had to leave, he was looking around; if 23 others were present, he would leave, otherwise he would not leave. They were in session from the daily morning sacrifice to the daily evening sacrifice. On Sabbaths and holidays, they were sitting in the study hall on the Temple Mount. If a question of practice came up, if they had heard the answer, they told them; otherwise they prepared to vote. If a majority was for acquitting, they acquitted. If a majority was for a guilty verdict, they rendered a verdict of guilty. If a majority was for declaring pure, they declared pure. If a majority was for declaring impure, they declared impure. From the time that there were many students of Shammai and Hillel who did not study enough under their teachers, many disagreements arose and two doctrines developed. From there, they were sending to all towns in the Land of Israel; any time they found a person who was wise, meek, even-tempered, benevolent, pleasing, humble, good-hearted, with good intentions, and well endowed, they were placing him on the court of the Temple Mount, from there to the court on the glacis, and from there to the High Court in the free-stone hall.

HALAKHAH: “Civil suits are decided,” etc. Rebbi Yannai said, if the Torah had been given decided, no foot could stand. What is the reason? The Eternal spoke to Moses. He said before Him: Master of the Universe, inform me what is the practice. He told him, to bend after the majority. If there was a majority for acquitting, they acquitted; if there was a majority for convicting, they convicted; so that the Torah could be explained in 49 ways impure and 49 ways pure, the numerical value of ודגלו. And so it says: the commands of the Eternal are pure sayings; molten silver in an earthenware crucible, refined sevenfold. And it says, the straightforward love You.

HALAKHAH: “Civil suits can be retried both for credit and for debit,” etc. If he left the court being acquitted, and they found reasons for conviction, could I understand that one returned him? The verse says, do not slay the acquitted. If he left the court being convicted, and they found reasons for acquittal, could I understand that one should not return him? The verse says, but do not slay the innocent. I could think that if he is acquitted in your court, he is acquitted in My court; the verse says, I shall not acquit the wicked. Rebbi Isaac said, Rebbi Yose told me: There is no difference; if the acquittal was in error, one retries him.

HALAKHAH: “Civil suits can be retried both for credit and for debit,” etc. If he left the court being acquitted, and they found reasons for conviction, could I understand that one returned him? The verse says, do not slay the acquitted. If he left the court being convicted, and they found reasons for acquittal, could I understand that one should not return him? The verse says, but do not slay the innocent. I could think that if he is acquitted in your court, he is acquitted in My court; the verse says, I shall not acquit the wicked. Rebbi Isaac said, Rebbi Yose told me: There is no difference; if the acquittal was in error, one retries him.

HALAKHAH: “Civil suits can be retried both for credit and for debit,” etc. If he left the court being acquitted, and they found reasons for conviction, could I understand that one returned him? The verse says, do not slay the acquitted. If he left the court being convicted, and they found reasons for acquittal, could I understand that one should not return him? The verse says, but do not slay the innocent. I could think that if he is acquitted in your court, he is acquitted in My court; the verse says, I shall not acquit the wicked. Rebbi Isaac said, Rebbi Yose told me: There is no difference; if the acquittal was in error, one retries him.

HALAKHAH: “Civil suits can be retried both for credit and for debit,” etc. If he left the court being acquitted, and they found reasons for conviction, could I understand that one returned him? The verse says, do not slay the acquitted. If he left the court being convicted, and they found reasons for acquittal, could I understand that one should not return him? The verse says, but do not slay the innocent. I could think that if he is acquitted in your court, he is acquitted in My court; the verse says, I shall not acquit the wicked. Rebbi Isaac said, Rebbi Yose told me: There is no difference; if the acquittal was in error, one retries him.

HALAKHAH: “In civil suits, one who argued for credit,” etc. Rebbi said, if they only miss saying, Mr. X, you are acquitted, or you are convicted; it does not apply to the discussion. Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, it also applies to the discussion.

HALAKHAH: “If they found him innocent, they free him,” etc. It was stated: If one of the witnesses said, I have an argument for his acquittal, and another came to support him, (and another came to support him,) whom do you co-opt? Let us hear from the following of Rebbi Joḥanan: If somebody was acquitted following his own pleading, one does not place him with the judges. Therefore, if he was acquitted following (his own) pleading, then one person would be simultaneously witness and judge. We do not find that anybody can be both witness and judge.

HALAKHAH: “If they found him innocent, they free him,” etc. It was stated: If one of the witnesses said, I have an argument for his acquittal, and another came to support him, (and another came to support him,) whom do you co-opt? Let us hear from the following of Rebbi Joḥanan: If somebody was acquitted following his own pleading, one does not place him with the judges. Therefore, if he was acquitted following (his own) pleading, then one person would be simultaneously witness and judge. We do not find that anybody can be both witness and judge.

If nobody changes his opinion? Rebbi Joḥanan said, he is acquitted. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, he is convicted. Rebbi Joḥanan said to him, is he not acquitted? Why do they have to continue to argue with one another? So the judgment should not be in question.

If nobody changes his opinion? Rebbi Joḥanan said, he is acquitted. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, he is convicted. Rebbi Joḥanan said to him, is he not acquitted? Why do they have to continue to argue with one another? So the judgment should not be in question.

The other explains : Thus spake David before the Holy One, blessed be He, "Lord of the Universe, am I not godly, seeing that all the kings of the East and West sit in companies in all their pomp, whereas my hands are stained with the blood of a foetus or with the placenta in order to pronounce a woman clean to her husband ? Moreover, whatever I do I discuss with my teacher Mephibosheth, saying to him, 'Mephibosheth, my teacher, have I decided well ? Have I convicted correctly or acquitted correctly ? Did I rightly pronounce clean or rightly pronounce unclean?' And I was not ashamed [so to do]."