The mishnah on 27b began by listing all the relatives who are disqualified to testify in a case and concluded with this dispute between Rabbi Yehuda and the rabbis:
One who loves or one who hates one of the litigants is also disqualified. One who loves — this is referring to his groomsman. One who hates — this is referring to anyone who, out of enmity, did not speak with the litigant for three days. The rabbis said to Rabbi Yehuda: The Jewish people are not suspected of bearing false witness due to love or hate.
Rabbi Yehuda’s stance makes sense: Humans are fallible; if someone wishes you ill, the odds of them giving false testimony to your detriment are higher. But contra Rabbi Yehuda, the rabbis assert that Jews will not alter their testimony in court in order to help a friend or hurt an enemy.
Nonetheless, the Gemara on today’s daf explains the scriptural derivation of Rabbi Yehuda’s disqualifications:
The sages taught in a beraita: “And he was not his enemy, neither sought his harm,” (Numbers 35:23). One about whom it can be stated “and he was not his enemy” can testify about him. And one who “neither sought his harm” can judge him.
Only one who is not an enemy and wishes the defendant no harm can be trusted not to testify falsely to the detriment of the accused. The Gemara goes on to suggest that we can logically derive the reverse: Just as we are concerned one who hates the litigant may give false testimony to the litigant’s detriment, one who loves the litigant might be tempted to give false testimony to their benefit. Therefore, whether they love or hate the accused, the not-neutral party is disqualified from giving testimony.
But recall that this is only Rabbi Yehuda’s view; the rabbis disagree, saying we don’t suspect Jews of bearing false witness on the basis of their strong sentiments about the accused. Therefore, the Gemara is now tasked with finding another meaning for the verse from Numbers:
And what do the rabbis derive from this verse: “And he was not his enemy, neither sought his harm”? One part of the verse is necessary for the halakhah that a judge who loves or hates a litigant is disqualified.
The rabbis concede to Rabbi Yehuda that judges might be suspected of rendering an unfair ruling biased by sentiment, so one mention of enemy in the verse is understood to disqualify non-neutral judges. And the other?
The other part of the verse is interpreted in accordance with that which is taught in a beraita: Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says: “And he was not his enemy, neither sought his harm” — it is derived from here that two Torah scholars who hate each other cannot sit in judgment together as one.
According to the rabbis, the second part of the verse comes to disqualify judges rather than witnesses; but in this case, the disqualification is premised on how the judges feel about each other, not one of the litigants. We fear that if two scholars hate one another, they may be inclined to rule or argue against the other simply to be contrarian.
The suggestion that rabbis have greater faith in non-neutral witnesses than non-neutral judges may at first be surprising. Often, the rabbis have greater faith in more knowledgeable authorities than the common person. But two points are worth mentioning: One, as we’ve established before, not all judges ruling on a case are necessarily informed, educated experts. And, more crucially, the role of witnesses and judges is different. Witnesses testify to what they’ve observed; if a person gives false testimony inspired by love or hate of the accused, they’re aware that they’re lying and subverting the law. Whereas judges, who are weighing the information they receive, analyzing the facts of a case and coming to an ultimate judgment, might have their analysis biased by sentiment without consciously making such a choice. Therefore, while the rabbis trust the Jewish people to not purposefully lie and subvert justice based on preference or dislike, they do still worry about how such unconscious biases might impact a person’s more subjective judgment.
Read all of Sanhedrin 29 on Sefaria.
This piece originally appeared in a My Jewish Learning Daf Yomi email newsletter sent on January 15, 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.
