62
— ee—— rr
49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55.
56.
57. 58.
59. 60. 61. 62. 63. . Ber 19a; they were later listed by Maimonides (Yad, Hil. Talmud Torah 6 and in
65.
66.
Walter Jacob
San 43 a; Matt 27.34; Mark 15.23.
San 82 b; Ker 5 a.
Makkot 7a.
Pes 91a; Yoma 11a; J Pes 36a; Moed Katan 8lc.
Moed Katan 16a.
81b-82 a.
J. Newman, Semikhah( Manchester , England: 1950), cited a number of opinions. It was the common consensus that ordination ceased after R. Hillel Hanasi(320-370), while H. J. Bornstein claimed that it continued until the time of Maimonides (1135-1205). Newman, himself, felt that it ended with David b. Azaria in 1062.
M. Ket 3.7; B K 8.6, though larger fines could be imposed by the court(Baba Kama 96 b).
J. Pes 30d.
M. Jung, The Jewish Law of Theft(New York: 1929); M. Elon , Hamishpat Ha-ivri (Jerusalem : 1973).
Ezra 10.8. Earlier it had referred to consecration to God (Lev 27.28; Nu 18.14, etc.), in conquest(Nu 21.2,3) as punishment(Ex 22.19; Deut 13.16), or as part of a vow(Jud 11.30).
Nu 12.14, though that punishment was limited to seven days.
Against scholars for unwillingness to comply with the majority decision(BM 59b); for various lay offenses( Kid 72a, Shab 130a, Pes 53a).
Moed Katan 16 a.
Mod Katan 15 a b; B M 59b, etc.
the Shulhan Arukh, Yoreh Deah 334. The offenses are not related in any way. M..San 3.1; San 5a; R.H. 25b. The death penalty could only be exercised by a court of 23 during the time when the court of 71 sat in the Chamber of Hewn Stone, which ceased before 70 C.E.
Asher ben Yehiel klal 101.1; Judah b. Asher , Responsa(Zikhron Yehudah, Jerusalem 1967)# 79 The courts were no longer a bet din, but the elders of the city. The justification was necessity, i.e. the problems of the hour, the need to create order out of chaos, the prevention of the wicked reigning supreme, the protection of the community,(Asher ben Yehiel , Klal 17.1, 6; Solomon b. Aderet, Responsa, 4.185; 5.238; and others. In addition there was the preventive measure of keeping Jewish affairs in the hands of the Jewish minority and out of the general courts, which would lead to the end of Jewish semiautonomy,(Asher ben Yehiel , Klal 17.8) or to courts in which justice could not be guaranteed(Yam shel Shelomo, Perek 8. 7 quoting a Sephardic responsum). There was a special need to act against informers, so this was possible even on Yom Kippur which fell on shabbat(Asher ben Yehiel Responsa 107.6; Adret, Responsa, 1.80).
All of these common sense arguments were used and a new judiciary was created. It based itself on the older legal system and its penalties even though at times clearly recognizing that the justification was precarious.
As the fundamental nature of the judiciary had changed other changes followed with equally little justification from the past. As we look at the earlier courts and their medieval successors we will note many distinctions. The laws of evidence have been greatly relaxed and punishments changed. It