JUDAICA - Wisdom In Torah

sengers were sent out all over the country of Israel, and they
looked for judges who were wise and feared sin and were
humble and clearsighted and of good appearance and good
manners, and first they made them judges in their towns,
and then they brought them to the gates of the Temple, and
finally they would elevate them to the Great Court” (Maim.
loc. cit., 2:8).
QUALIFICATIONS. The judicial qualifications have been enumerated
by Maimonides as follows: judges must be wise and
sensible, learned in the law and full of knowledge, and also acquainted
to some extent with other subjects such as medicine,
arithmetic, astronomy and astrology, and the ways of sorcerers
and magicians and the absurdities of idolatry and suchlike
matters (so as to know how to judge them); a judge must not
be too old, nor may he be a eunuch or a childless man; and as
he must be pure in mind, so must he be pure from bodily defects,
but as well a man of stature and imposing appearance;
and he should be conversant in many languages so as not to
stand in need of interpreters. The seven fundamental qualities
of a judge are wisdom, humility, fear of God, disdain of
money, love of truth, love of people, and a good reputation.
A judge must have a good eye, a humble soul, must be pleasant
in company, and speak kindly to people; he must be very
strict with himself and conquer lustful impulses; he must have
a courageous heart to save the oppressed from the oppressor’s
hate, cruelty, and persecution, and eschew wrong and injustice
(Yad, Sanh. 2:1–7). Playing cards for money or other games of
chance and lending money on interest also disqualify a person
from judicial functions (Sanh. 3:3). A judge who is a relative
of one of the litigants, or has any other personal relationship
toward him (“loves him or hates him”), must disqualify himself
from sitting in judgment over him (Sanh. 3:4–5). A judge
should not engage in manual work, so as not to expose himself
to popular contempt (Kid. 70a).
PRINCIPLES OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT. A judge must show
patience, indulgence, humility, and respect for persons when
sitting in court (Yad, Sanh. 25:1; Sh. Ar., ḤM 7:2–5); he must
always hear both parties to the case (Sanh. 7b; Shev. 31a; and
Codes); he may not in any way discriminate between the parties
(Lev. 19:15; Shev. 30a–31a; Yad, Sanh. 21:1–2; 20:5–7; Sh. Ar.,
ḤM 17:1 and commentaries ad. loc.); nor may he act under the
possible pressures of any undue influence, including *bribery
by money or by words (Deut. 16:19; Sanh. 3:5; Shab. 119a; Ket.
105b; and Codes); he must, on the one hand, proceed with
deliberation and care, and reconsider again and again before
finally pronouncing his verdict (Avot 1:1; Sanh. 35a; Sif. Deut.
16 and Codes), but may not, on the other hand, unduly delay
justice (Yad, Sanh. 14:10 and 20:6); and he must so conduct
himself that justice is not only done but is also manifestly seen
to be done (Yoma 38a; Shek. 3:2) and readily understood by
the litigants (ḤM 14:4). Before joining a court, a judge must
satisfy himself that the judges sitting with him are properly
qualified (Yad, Sanh. 2:14); and no judge should sit together
with another judge whom he hates or despises (Sh. Ar., ḤM
bet din and judges
7:8). Nor may a judge – especially in criminal cases – instead
of considering and deciding the issue before him on his own,
rely on the opinion of greater judges in the court and try thus
to disburden himself of his judicial responsibility (Tosef.,
Sanh. 3:8; Yad, Sanh. 10:1).
[Haim Hermann Cohn]
Talmudic Period
The rabbis ascribe the development of battei din to leading
biblical personalities such as Shem, Moses, Gideon, Jephthah,
Samuel, David, and Solomon (Mak. 23b; Av. Zar. 36b; RH 2:9;
RH 25a). Historical evidence of the existence of a bet din in
the time of Jehoshaphat is found in Deuteronomy Rabbah 19:8.
However, the bet din belongs essentially to the period of the
Second Temple, and its establishment is attributed to *Ezra.
He decreed that a bet din, which was to sit on Mondays and
Thursdays (BK 82a), be established in all populated centers.
These were local courts, while the Great Sanhedrin of Jerusalem
served as the supreme court (Deut. 17:8–13; Sot. 1:4:
Sanh. 1:6). The Sanhedrin existed for the duration of the Second
Temple. A decree against immoral behavior is ascribed
to the bet din of the Hasmoneans (Av. Zar. 36b).
After the destruction of the Temple, *Johanan b. Zakkai
established his bet din in Jabneh as the cultural and political
center of the Jews, and it succeeded the previous Sanhedrin
Gedolah. The Jabneh bet din was responsible for regulating
the calendar and thereby became the religious and national
center not only of Ereẓ Israel, but also of the Diaspora. In
addition to this central bet din, local battei din continued to
function, particularly in the vicinity of the academies. The
Talmud speaks of the courts of R. Eliezer in Lydda, R. Joshua
in Peki’in, R. Akiva in Bene-Berak, and R. Yose in Sepphoris
(Sanh. 32b). Under R. Johanan’s successor, *Gamaliel II,
the power and influence of the central bet din increased. The
summit of its authority was reached under *Judah ha-Nasi I.
His grandson, Judah Nesia, may be regarded as the last nasi
under whose direction the bet din was still the actual center
of the Jewish people. The Talmud therefore refers to Gamaliel
and his bet din (Tosef., Ber. 2:6) and to Judah ha-Nasi and his
bet din (Av. Zar. 2:6), thereby indicating the central civil and
religious authority of the Jews.
Toward the middle of the third century, the bet din of
the nasi gradually lost its importance due to the rise of Jewish
scholarship in Babylonia and the increased oppression of
Palestinian Jewry under Roman rule. Although the office of
the nasi continued until the end of the fifth century, his bet
din was no longer the center of the Jewish people. In Babylonia,
no bet din ever achieved preeminent authority, even for
Babylonia alone. This situation continued throughout the geonic
period, as no central bet din could be established because
of the rivalry between the two academies.
Medieval and Modern Period
The bet din became the stronghold of Jewish *autonomy in the
Middle Ages, and continued with reduced powers into modern
times. It experienced many changes in the various centers
ENCYCLOPAEDIA JUDAICA, Second Edition, Volume 3 515