Today’s daf discusses a series of actions that require the approval of the Great Sanhedrin, a body consisting of 71 judges. These include sitting in judgment of a high priest and authorizing a king’s directive to engage in a war of choice (in contrast to a war of obligation that has been directly commanded by God). These rulings were stated plainly in the first mishnah of the tractate, but the Gemara provides some rationale for each of them.
Let’s take the case of the false prophet. Why is he subject to discipline at the hands of the Great Sanhedrin?
Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Hanina, says: It is derived from presumptuousness (stated in the context of a false prophet) from presumptuousness (stated in the context of a) rebellious elder. Just as there, against a court of 71, so too here by 71.
How is the false prophet like a rebellious elder? In referring to each of them, Deuteronomy uses a version of the Hebrew word zadon, meaning presumptuousness. Using a gezera shava — a hermeneutical technique we have seen countless times already in our journey through Daf Yomi, in which two seemingly unrelated texts are joined together through their use of a particular word or phrase — the Gemara yokes the fate of the false prophet to that of the rebellious elder. Because we know the rebellious elder is judged by a court of 71 judges, so too is the false prophet.
But does that hold?
But when presumptuousness is written (with regard to a rebellious elder), it is written with regard to the death penalty, and a death sentence may be issued by a court of 23. Rather, Reish Lakish said: It is derived with word (stated in the context of a false prophet) learned from word, (used when describing the) rebellion.
The Gemara notes that the rebellious elder is subject to the death penalty, which can be handed down by a smaller court of only 23 judges, so we can’t conclude on that basis that a false prophet needs a court of 71 judges. Instead, Resh Lakish points us to a different verbal analogy based on the word davar, which means “word” or “speak” and also appears both in the verse about the false prophet and a couple of verses before the reference to the rebellious elder. In the latter context, it surfaces in a discussion about the requirement to present especially difficult disputes to the priests in Jerusalem. That’s sufficiently close that we can conclude that a false prophet is tried by a larger court of 71 judges.
But then the Gemara puts forward an interesting proposition: The first time around, we connected the false prophet and the rebellious elder through “presumptuousness” and suggested that the false prophet followed the rebellious elder in requiring 71 judges. But what if we went the other way? Now that we have connected the two verses through the common word “davar,” can we conclude that just as we need 71 judges to judge a false prophet, we also need 71 to judge a rebellious elder?
No, says the Gemara, we can’t. The Gemara is silent on the reasoning, but Rashi comments that we can’t use verbal analogies any way we please. The situations in which it applies have been passed from teacher to student, stretching back to Moses at Sinai. Coming up with our own innovations is a bridge too far. So while our daf explains why a false prophet is tried by 71 judges, we’ll have to leave the procedures for a rebellious elder for another day and another page.
Read all of Sanhedrin 16 on Sefaria.
This piece originally appeared in a My Jewish Learning Daf Yomi email newsletter sent on January 2, 2025. If you are interested in receiving the newsletter, sign up here.
Help us keep Jewish knowledge accessible to millions of people around the world.
Your donation to My Jewish Learning fuels endless journeys of Jewish discovery. With your help, My Jewish Learning can continue to provide nonstop opportunities for learning, connection and growth.
