Sanhedrin - Daf 6
- Machlokes about the number of דיינים required for פשרה
The Gemara quoted Shmuel saying that a ruling of דיני ממונות made by two judges is valid, but Rebbe Abahu said that all Tannaim agree it is not valid. The Gemara suggests this question is a machlokes Tannaim, because Rebbe Meir says: ביצוע בשלשה – a compromise must be made by three judges, but the Chochomim say: פשרה ביחיד – a compromise may be made by a lone judge. The Gemara assumes all Tannaim agree that מקשינן פשרה לדין - we compare compromise to straightforward justice (based on the passuk "משפט וצדקה" – justice and righteousness, the latter referring to פשרה). Rebbe Meir requires three judges for פשרה because he requires three for standard judgements of דיני ממונות, whereas the Chochomim hold דיני ממונות can be decided by two judges (or even one), so a single judge may make a פשרה. The Gemara responds that it is possible all Tannaim require three judges to rule on monetary cases, but argue whether we compare פשרה to דין or not. Although Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel was quoted on the previous Daf requiring two judges for פשרה, he may actually only require one, but said “two” so there should be witnesses to the compromise.
- If פשרה is optional, forbidden, or a mitzvah
The Gemara cites several opinions about the propriety of פשרה. A Baraisa states: נגמר הדין – once the case is complete, and the ruling was issued, אי אתה רשאי לבצוע – you are not permitted to make a compromise between the litigants. This implies that before then, it is permitted. Rebbe Eliezer the son of Rebbe Yose Haglili says: אסור לבצוע – it is forbidden for a judge to make a compromise, וכל הבוצע הרי זה חוטא – and any [judge] who makes a compromise is a sinner, וכל המברך את הבוצע הרי זה מנאץ – and anyone who praises [a judge] who compromises is a blasphemer, and referred to by the passuk "בצע ברך נאץ ה" – one who praises a compromiser has blasphemed Hashem. Rather, יקוב הדין את ההר – let justice pierce the mountain! Rebbe Yehoshua ben Korchah says: מצוה לבצוע – it is a mitzvah to make a compromise, which the Gemara eventually interprets as offering the litigants the option to compromise [the halachah follows this opinion]. Rebbe Shimon ben Menasya says that if two people come for judgment, it is permitted to suggest a פשרה before the judge hears their statements, or before he knows in which direction the judgment leans, but not afterwards.
- How Dovid performed משפט and צדקה simultaneously
Rebbe Yehoshua ben Korchah, who says פשרה is a mitzvah, finds a source in a passuk teaching to judge "משפט שלום" – justice of peace. Since these are usually contradictory, he interprets it to refer to compromise. Similarly, a passuk says: "ויהי דוד עושה משפט וצדקה" – and Dovid Hamelech rendered judgment and righteousness. צדקה implies charity, which contradicts strict justice!? Rather, איזהו משפט שיש בו צדקה – what is the type of judgement which has righteousness in it? This is ביצוע – compromise. The Tanna who prohibits פשרה must interpret the passuk differently, and explains that when Dovid issued a ruling, and saw that a poor person was liable to pay, Dovid would pay it himself. This was משפט לזה שהחזיר לו ממון – justice for [the claimant], in that he returned his money to him, וצדקה לזה ששילם לו מתוך ביתו – and righteousness for [the defendant], in that [Dovid] paid [the claimant] from his own property. Rebbe objects that the passuk says he performed righteousness "לכל עמו" – for all his people, not just poor people!? Instead, he explains that although Dovid did not pay it himself, he performed “righteousness” for the defendant, שהוציא גזילה מתחת ידו – in that he removed the theft from his possession.
