POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
Prepared by Rabbi P. Feldman
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question on the daf
Previous daf Sanhedrin 33
1) WHEN CAN WE OVERTURN A VERDICT?
(a) (Mishnah): A monetary verdict can be overturned, whether
Zechus or Chiyuv:
(b) Contradiction (Mishnah): A judge judged and acquitted the
guilty or obligated the innocent, he declared Tamei what
is Tahor or declared Tahor what is Tamei, what he did
stands, he must pay for the loss he caused.
(c) Answer #1 (Rav Yosef): Our Mishnah refers to a Mumcheh
(if he retracts, we are confident that now he is
correct), that Mishnah discusses a judge that is not
1. Question: Is it really true that we overturn the
verdict of a Mumcheh?!
(d) Answer #2 (Rav Chisda): If the judge himself transferred
the money, the verdict stands; if he did not, we overturn
i. (Mishnah): A Mumcheh l'Rabim is exempt (if he
erred). (If he can overturn his verdict, there
is nothing to pay for!)
2. Answer #1 (Rav Nachman): A bigger Chacham can
overturn the verdict, if there is no bigger Chacham,
the verdict stands.
3. Answer #2 (Rav Sheshes): If he was To'eh bi'Dvar
Mishnah (this will be explained), we overturn the
verdict; if he was To'eh b'Shikul ha'Da'as (ruled
unlike the primary opinion), the verdict stands.
4. Question (Ravina): If he erred in (a Tosefta of) R.
Chiya and R. Oshaya, is this considered To'eh
5. Answer (Rav Ashi): Yes.
6. Question (Ravina): What if he erred in a teaching of
Rav and Shmuel?
7. Answer (Rav Ashi): This is also To'eh bi'Dvar
8. Question (Ravina): What if he erred in one of our
9. Answer (Rav Ashi): We are also Amora'im (this is
also To'eh bi'Dvar Mishnah)!
10. Question: What is To'eh b'Shikul ha'Da'as?
11. Answer (Rav Papa): If two Tana'im or Amora'im argue
with each other, and the Halachah was not fixed like
either one, but the discussion favors one of the
opinions (and the judge ruled like the other
12. Question (against Rav Sheshes - Rav Hamnuna -
Mishnah): A case occurred, the womb of a cow was
removed, R. Tarfon ruled that it is Treifah, they
fed it to dogs;
i. Chachamim in Yavneh said that it is Kosher,
because they cut the wombs of all cows and pigs
that leave Miztrayim (so they will not
reproduce, but they live).
13. Answer: Indeed, R. Akiva gave a second reason to
ii. R. Tarfon: I will lose my donkey on account of
iii. R. Akiva: You are Mumcheh l'Rabim, you are
iv. Summation of question: If we overturn a Ta'us
bi'Dvar Mishnah, that is enough to exempt R.
i. Since you were To'eh bi'Dvar Mishnah, we
overturn the verdict, you are exempt;
14. Question (Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak): How could Rav
Hamnuna ask from that case - R. Tarfon fed it to
dogs, it will not help to overturn the verdict!
ii. Even if you were To'eh b'Shikul ha'Da'as, since
you are a Mumcheh l'Rabim, you would be exempt.
15. Answer (Rava): If you will say that To'eh bi'Dvar
Mishnah the verdict stands, we understand why R.
Tarfon thought he would be liable;
i. But if To'eh bi'Dvar Mishnah can be overturned,
why did he expect to be liable? Since if the
cow was around his ruling has no effect, even
if it is not around, his ruling should have no
(e) Question: That explains (when the Mishnah says) 'if he
obligated the innocent';
1. But regarding 'he acquitted the guilty' he said 'you
are exempt' - he did not transfer money!
(f) Answer #1: Saying 'you are exempt' is like bodily
transferring the money.
1. Question: Our Mishnah says that a monetary verdict
can be overturned, whether Zechus or Chiyuv:
i. We understand Chiyuv - originally, he said 'you
are Chayav' and did not transfer the money
himself, and later he retracted;
2. Answer: Our Mishnah means, a monetary verdict of
Chiyuv can be overturned, even though this was
Zechus for the other party (but a verdict of
'exempt' cannot be overturned).
ii. But if saying 'you are exempt' is like bodily
transferring the money, this can never be
i. Inference: The Mishnah says, in capital cases
we overturn a verdict of Chiyuv, not of Zechus
- this must mean, we can change to say Zechus
only if it does not harm anyone else (e.g.
Ploni was sentenced for desecrating Shabbos).
2) CHANGING THE VERDICT
(g) Answer #2 (to Question (f) - Ravina): Almoni had a
security of Ploni; when the judge exempted Ploni, he took
the security and gave it to Ploni.
ii. Question: Who could be harmed if Ploni is
3. Objection #1: Will we kill Ploni on account of (not
wanting to retract, for this would upset) the Go'el
iii. Answer: (In a murder case,) the Go'el ha'Dam
(the relative of the victim) is harmed (he
hoped to avenge the murder).
4. Objection #2: The Mishnah says that a monetary
verdict can be overturned, *whether* Zechus *or*
5. These questions are left difficult.
(h) 'He declared Tamei what is Tahor' can also be through the
judge's action - he touched a Sheretz to it to 'prove'
that it is Tamei;
1. Regarding 'he declared Tahor what is Tamei', the
judge mixed it with other Taharos of Ploni to
'prove' that it is Tahor.
(a) (Mishnah): In capital cases (we can overturn a verdict of
Chiyuv, not of Zechus).
3) ARGUING FOR ZECHUS
(b) (Beraisa) Question: What is the source that if Beis Din
sentenced Ploni to die, and someone had a reason for
Zechus, that we return him and reconsider the verdict?
(c) Answer: "V'Naki (v'Tzadik) Al Taharog".
(d) Question: What is the source that if Beis Din acquitted
Ploni, and someone had a reason for Chiyuv, that we do
not reconsider the verdict?
(e) Answer: "V'Tzadik Al Taharog".
(f) (Rav Simi bar Ashi): The opposite applies to a Mesis (we
return to Mechayev, not to acquit) - "V'Lo Sachmol v'Lo
(g) (Rav Kahana): We learn from "Ki Harog Tahargenu".
(h) Question (R. Zeira): What is the source that someone
sentenced or exempted from Galus (for killing
unintentionally) has the same law (like regular capital
transgressions, we only overturn a verdict of Chiyuv)?
(i) Answer (Rav Sheshes): We learn from a Gezerah Shavah
(j) Question (R. Zeira): What is the source for someone
sentenced or exempted from lashes?
(k) Answer (Rav Sheshes): We learn from a Gezerah Shavah
(l) Support (Beraisa): We learn Chayavei Galuyos from
"Rotze'ach-Rotze'ach"; we learn Chayavei Malkos from
(m) (Mishnah): We do not overturn a verdict of Zechus.
(n) (R. Chiya bar Aba citing R. Yochanan): This is only if
the mistake was about something that the Tzedukim (who do
not rely on our Oral tradition) do not agree to - but
something that even they agree to is such a basic
mistake, we overturn it.
(o) Question (R. Chiya bar Aba): What if they exempted
(p) Answer (R. Yochanan): You can answer that from what you
already know (the above law - Tzedukim admit to this).
(q) (R. Ami): If they exempted adulterers, we overturn this.
(r) Question: What is a case (of adultery) which we do not
overturn? (The Mishnah said that in capital cases, we do
not overturn a verdict of Zechus - it did not specify,
implying that this applies (at least sometimes) to every
(s) Answer: They exempted them for unnatural relations.
(a) (Mishnah): In monetary cases, anyone can give a reason
for Zechus or Chiyuv...
(b) Inference: *Anyone* includes the witnesses.
(c) Suggestion: Our Mishnah is like R. Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah,
it is not like Chachamim.
1. (Beraisa): "V'Ed Echad Lo Ya'aneh v'Nefesh" - for
Zechus or Chiyuv.
(d) Answer (Rav Papa): No, *anyone* includes the Talmidim;
all agree to the Mishnah.
2. R. Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah says, he can speak for
Zechus, not for Chiyuv.