Beit Din

Notable Sources

All Sources

The Foundation of Justice

TANAKH

The establishment of a structured judicial system with wise and experienced leaders is crucial for maintaining justice and addressing disputes. In Deuteronomy, Moses instructs the Israelites to appoint leaders to help him bear the burden of governance and ensure fair and impartial judgment.

Thereupon I said to you, “I cannot bear the burden of you by myself. Your God יהוה has multiplied you until you are today as numerous as the stars in the sky.— May יהוה, the God of your ancestors, increase your numbers a thousandfold, and bless you as promised.— How can I bear unaided the trouble of you, and the burden, and the bickering! Pick from each of your tribes candidates who are wise, discerning, and experienced, and I will appoint them as your heads.” You answered me and said, “What you propose to do is good.”…

Deuteronomy 1:9-18

The Power of Social Ostracism in Jewish Law

HALAKHAH

The beit din's decrees of severe social and communal ostracism highlight the lengths to which Jewish courts would go to enforce compliance with Jewish law. Rabbeinu Tam, a medieval Jewish authority, established these isolating measures to compel recalcitrant husbands to grant a get (divorce).

Therefore, this beit din decrees with a severe oath (be-alah hamurah) that every man and woman of the house of Israel is forbidden to speak with him, to do business with him, to circumcise his son, to provide him with food and drink, to interact with him, to visit him during his time of illness and to bury him in a Jewish cemetery.

Rabbinic Authority III, Part II; Rabbinic Authority; The Reality, Chapter 8; Decisions in Even haEzer, e) The scope of the mais ali plea and the imposition of harhakot ("the isolating measures") of Rabbeinu Tam 42

Innovations in Halakha for Women's Well-Being

JEWISH THOUGHT

The sages were willing to innovate halakhically to protect the well-being of the wife, even to the extent of annulling the validity of kiddushin in some cases to dissolve a marriage retroactively. Rabbi Eliezer Berkovits explores the lengths to which Jewish law can go to safeguard women's rights within marriage and divorce.

Another category of halakhot shows the extent to which our sages were willing to go in halakhic innovation in order to protect the vital well-being of the wife against the power that the form of kiddushin provides for the husband. In certain cases they were even willing to annul the validity of the kiddushin and thus dissolve the marriage retroactively, freeing the wife from the need for a divorce. The origin of such a ruling is found in Tractate Gittin. According to the din (law)…

Jewish Women in Time and Torah, iv Contemporary Halakhic Issues Regarding Women 82

The Same Judges Throughout

COMMENTARY

The Mishnah outlines the stringent procedural requirements for dealing with a wayward and rebellious son, emphasizing the necessity of the same judges being present throughout the entire process. The Mishnah, the first codification of Jewish law from the early third-century land of Israel, discusses the ethical and legal implications of disciplining a wayward and rebellious son as described in Deuteronomy.

He is warned in the presence of three and beaten. If he transgresses again after this, he is tried by a court of twenty three. He cannot be sentenced to stoning unless the first three are present, because it says, “this our son” (Deut. 21:20), [implying], this one who was whipped in your presence. The Torah states that the wayward and rebellious son had already been disciplined before he is brought to the elders to be stoned. Our mishnah understands this to be a formal beating administered by the court. The idea is to pressure the child to change before it is too late…

English Explanation of Mishnah Sanhedrin 8:4:4

Ad Hoc Courts in Jewish Law

GUIDES

In ancient Jewish society, courts of three judges were often assembled ad hoc to adjudicate specific cases, highlighting a flexible yet organized judicial system. The Babylonian Talmud, particularly in tractate Sanhedrin, discusses the various types of Jewish courts, including the great Sanhedrin, lesser Sanhedrins, and ad hoc courts.

As opposed to the higher courts, i.e., the lesser Sanhedrin of twenty-three judges and the great Sanhedrin of seventy-one, which were permanent institutions whose judges were chosen by the great Sanhedrin, courts of three judges were often assembled ad hoc for the purpose of a adjudicating a specific case.

Introductions to the Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin, Introduction to Perek III 6

Sanhedrin's Unique Power

MIDRASH

The Sanhedrin in Jerusalem held unique authority in matters of capital punishment, setting it apart from other courts. The Sifrei Devarim, a second-century halakhic midrash, emphasizes the centralization of judicial authority in Jewish law and tradition.

(Devarim 17:11) "And you shall do according to the thing that they tell you from that place which the L-rd chooses": By the ruling of the great beth-din in Jerusalem (i.e., the Sanhedrin) the death penalty obtains, and not by the ruling of the beth-din in Yavneh.

Sifrei Devarim 154:1

The Judicial Process of Conversion

TALMUD

A conversion to Judaism is considered a form of judgment, requiring the presence of three judges. The Talmudic tractate Kiddushin derives this requirement from Leviticus 24:22, which equates the law for converts with that for native-born Jews.

A convert requires the presence of three Jews for his conversion. What is the reason for this requirement? It is written with regard to a convert: “You shall have one manner of law, for the convert as for the homeborn” (Leviticus 24:22), which indicates that a conversion is considered a judgment that requires three judges. And if he requires three judges, who says that those three will be available to him? Since he cannot convert at a time of his choosing, it is not considered within his power to convert.

Kiddushin 62b:1

Personal Accountability in Beit Din

HALAKHAH

The strict limitations on appointing representatives in beit din highlight the importance of personal accountability in Jewish legal proceedings. Rabbi Chaim Jachter's analysis in Gray Matter explores the Shulchan Arukh, the authoritative 16th-century code of Jewish law, and Rama's guidelines on when a litigant may appoint a representative in a beit din.

The Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 123:15 and 124:1) strictly limits when a litigant may appoint a representative to plead his case in beit din. He permits only the plaintiff to send a representative, and only if he is not present in the town where the trial takes place. According to the Shulchan Aruch, the defendant may never appoint a lawyer. Since the trial takes place in a beit din in the locale of the defendant, the Shulchan Aruch does not see a legitimate reason for the defendant to appoint a lawyer…

Gray Matter II, Beit Din, The Role of Lawyers in Beit Din 33

Protecting Debts in the Shemitah Year

HALAKHAH

Debts presented to the Beit Din for collection are not cancelled in the shemitah year. The Kitzur Shulchan Arukh, a 19th-century condensed code of Jewish law, explains how presenting debts to a Beit Din prevents their cancellation during the shemitah year.

If you present your notes of indebtedness to Beis Din and say to them: "Collect my debts for me," they are not cancelled in the shemitah year.

Kitzur Shulchan Arukh 180:9

Adjudicating Modern Legal Disputes in Jewish Law

HALAKHAH

Jewish law incorporates civil law and common trade practices into its legal framework, making them binding conditions that must be adjudicated by a Bet Din. Rabbi J. David Bleich explores how Jewish courts apply Halakha to modern legal disputes, particularly in contracts and rental agreements.

As noted earlier, although litigants may not voluntarily accept the jurisdiction of non-Jewish courts, nor may they agree that their disputes be adjudicated by a Bet Din on the basis of civil law, there are areas in which the particular provisions of Jewish law may be incorporated either explicitly or impliedly in a contract and made binding upon the parties. For example, Jewish law provides that rent is not due until the conclusion of the rental period. That provision is subject to variance by explicit agreement of the parties…

Contemporary Halakhic Problems, Vol V, Chapter I Litigation and Arbitration before Non Jews 75

The Qualities of a Judge

HALAKHAH

The integrity and effectiveness of a Beit Din (Jewish court) depend on the moral and ethical qualities of its judges. Rabbi Joseph Karo’s 16th-century legal code, the Shulchan Arukh, specifies seven essential characteristics that each judge must possess.

[With respect to the members of] a Court of three, it is necessary that each one of them should possess seven [characteristic] things, [viz.,] wisdom, humility, fear [of G-d], averseness to money [acquired illegitimately],, love of truth, love [manifested] towards them by [fellow] creatures [and] possessed of a good name.

Shulchan Arukh, Choshen Mishpat 7:11

The Weight of Justice

REFERENCE

The profound spiritual and moral responsibility of judges in Jewish courts is so significant that unjust judgment can lead to the loss of divine presence and even the judge's own life. This text reflects the values of the Amoraim, Jewish scholars from the Talmudic period, emphasizing the gravity of judicial responsibility and the belief that divine presence is linked to fair judgment as noted in the Babylonian Talmud.

The problem of fair judgment in Jewish courts was then of paramount importance and of this Rabbi Jonathan said: “One who sits in judgment should consider that a sword hangs over his head and the pit of damnation opens at his feet, for every judge who passes just sentence causes the Shechinah to dwell among Jews, but one who is unjust drives the Shechinah away and a judge who illegally deprives one man of his possessions and gives them to another will lose his life.”

The Jewish Spiritual Heroes, Volume II; The Amoraim of Palestine and the Jerusalem Talmud, Rabbi Jonathan ben Elazar 7

The Structure of Jewish Courts

MISHNAH

The Mishnah provides a detailed derivation and reasoning behind the number of judges required for the Great Sanhedrin and the lesser Sanhedrin, offering a fascinating glimpse into the scriptural and logical foundations of Jewish legal tradition. The Mishnah, the first codification of Jewish law from the early third-century land of Israel, in tractate Sanhedrin, outlines the structure and function of the ancient Jewish court system, including the Great Sanhedrin and lesser Sanhedrin.

With regard to the number of judges in the different courts the mishna presents a halakhic midrash: The Great Sanhedrin was composed of seventy-one judges, and a lesser Sanhedrin was composed of twenty-three. From where is it derived that the Great Sanhedrin was composed of seventy-one judges? As it is stated: “Gather Me seventy men of the Elders of Israel, whom you know to be the Elders of the people and officers over them, and bring them into the Tent of Meeting, and they shall stand there with you” (Numbers 11:16)…

Mishnah Sanhedrin 1:6

Resolving Disputes in Jewish Law

HALAKHAH

The decision-making process in Jewish law distinguishes between matters received through the Oral Tradition and those derived through logical analysis. In the Mishneh Torah, Rambam's famed 12th-century code of Jewish law, Maimonides outlines the procedural approach of the Sanhedrin, emphasizing the role of majority rule in resolving disputes derived from logical analysis.

There can never be any difference of opinion with regard to matters received through the Oral Tradition. Whenever there arises a difference of opinion with regard to a matter that shows that it was not received in the tradition from Moses our teacher.
The following principles apply with regard to matters derived through logical analysis. If the entire body of the Supreme Sanhedrin agrees with regard to them, their consent is binding. If there is a difference of opinion, we follow the majority and decide the matter according to the majority…

Mishneh Torah, Rebels 1:3

Interpreting and Enacting Jewish Law

MUSAR

The Beit Din, or Jewish court, plays a crucial role in interpreting and enacting laws and customs across generations. The 15th-century ethical work, Orchot Tzadikim, emphasizes the importance of adhering to the rulings of the Sages and Prophets as derived from the Torah.

These works will also make clear the rules which the Sages and Prophets of every generation decreed in order to make a fence about the Torah, as they heard explicitly from the mouth of Moses, as it is said, "Therefore shall ye keep my charge" (Lev. 18:30), that is to say, make a guard for the laws which were to be guarded (Moed Katan 5a). One can also obtain from these works a clear interpretation of the customs, and the regulations that our Sages enacted in every generation according to the way that the Bet Din of that generation understood the matter…

Orchot Tzadikim 27:18

Judges of Virtue and Righteousness

SECOND TEMPLE

Selecting judges who are zealous in virtue and righteousness is crucial for maintaining justice and reverence towards God. Josephus, a first-century Jewish historian, describes the judicial system in ancient Jewish society, emphasizing the importance of justice and the role of judges.

14. Let there be seven men to judge in every city, (20) and these such as have been before most zealous in the exercise of virtue and righteousness. Let every judge have two officers allotted him out of the tribe of Levi. Let those that are chosen to judge in the several cities be had in great honor; and let none be permitted to revile any others when these are present, nor to carry themselves in an insolent manner to them; it being natural that reverence towards those in high offices among men should procure men's fear and reverence towards God…

The Antiquities of the Jews 4:8:14

Relatedראו גם

Sheetsדפי מקורות

Related Sheets