Talmud zu Ketubot 9:2

מִי שֶׁמֵּת וְהִנִּיחַ אִשָּׁה וּבַעַל חוֹב וְיוֹרְשִׁין, וְהָיָה לוֹ פִקָּדוֹן אוֹ מִלְוֶה בְּיַד אֲחֵרִים, רַבִּי טַרְפוֹן אוֹמֵר, יִנָּתְנוּ לַכּוֹשֵׁל שֶׁבָּהֶן. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר, אֵין מְרַחֲמִין בַּדִּין, אֶלָּא יִנָּתְנוּ לַיּוֹרְשִׁין, שֶׁכֻּלָּן צְרִיכִין שְׁבוּעָה וְאֵין הַיּוֹרְשִׁין צְרִיכִין שְׁבוּעָה:

Wenn einer starb und eine Frau, einen Gläubiger und Erben hinterließ und ein Versprechen oder einen Kredit (der ihm schuldete) in den Händen anderer hatte, sagt R. Tarfon: Es soll den "Schwächsten" unter ihnen gegeben werden . [Einige erklären: Demjenigen, dessen Tat die letzte ist, ist er der "schwächste" von allen, der nicht in der Lage ist, Eigentum zu beschlagnahmen, das vor ihm verkauft worden war (dh vor dem Datum der Tat.) Andere erklären: dem ( Kethuba der Frau. Sie wird "am schwächsten" genannt, da es für eine Frau nicht angemessen ist, wie für einen Mann, das Eigentum eines Toten aufzusuchen und nachzufragen, wo er Land hat. Und obwohl das Eigentum der Waisenkinder nicht an den Gläubiger oder an die Kethuba der Frau gebunden ist, ist R. Tarfon hier, wo es nicht in ihrer Domäne liegt, der Ansicht, dass es der Hand des Schuldners oder der Hand des Schuldners entnommen ist Einer, der das Versprechen hat und dem Gläubiger oder der (Frau für sie) Kethuba gegeben hat.] R. Akiva sagt: "Es gibt keine Gnade im Gericht", und es wird den Erben [und der Beschlagnahme (durch die anderen) gegeben ) nützt nichts.] Für alle ist ein Eid erforderlich, für die Erben jedoch kein Eid. [Denn wenn jemand kommt, um vom Eigentum der Waisenkinder zu sammeln, kann er dies nur mit einem Eid tun. Und solange sie (die Antragsteller) nicht schwören, wissen wir nicht, ob ihnen überhaupt etwas geschuldet wird. Wenn der Vater stirbt, erben die Erben ihn (das Darlehen oder das Pfandrecht), und es liegt in ihrer Domäne.]

Jerusalem Talmud Sanhedrin

Samuel said, if two men acted as judges, their judgment stands, but they are called an insolent court³⁶Babli 3a,5b,30a,87b; Ketubot 22a. Cf. Berakhot 7:1, Note 18.. Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish both are instructing: Even³⁷Even if the parties accepted them as judges. if two men acted as judges, their judgment is no judgment³⁸In the Babli, this opinion is represented by Rava (5b) and R. Abbahu (87b), the student of R. Johanan and R. Simeon ben Laqish.. There, we have stated³⁹Mishnah Bekhorot 4:4. The Mishnah refers to a person who did not pass the required examinations and was not formally qualified as a judge.: “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 two⁴⁰Since R. Abbahu follows his teachers and holds that any judgment passed by a court of two judges is void, as well as from the following quote, it is clear that one has to read “three” in place of “two”.. What are we dealing with? If his error was that he judged them on his discretion⁴¹If there exists no clear precedent for the case; different schools promulgate different rules and he followed a minority opinion because it seemed to him to be the correct one, his judgment is valid but there is no reason why he should have to pay. The Babli, 33a, declares a judgment against a clear majority of opinions as an error in law., then what he did is done. If his error was that he judged them by Torah law⁴²If his judgment contradicted a Mishnah or a clear precedent, in Israel a judgment of the Patriarch’s court or in Babylonia a concurrent judgment of both Yeshivot, his judgment is void (cf. Ketubot 9:2, Note 100). If any money changed hands as a consequence of the erroneous judgment, it has to be returned., 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 pocket⁴³As a fine. because he was presumptuous to judge alone by Torah law, as we have stated⁴⁴Mishnah Avot 4:8.: “Do not judge sitting alone, for only One judges sitting alone.”

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Vorheriger Vers Ganzes Kapitel Nächster Vers