17

The Wisdom of Sleeping on a Decision

Our Gemara on Amud Aleph describes the careful safeguards implemented in capital cases. To prevent the court from being carried away by an overly zealous and condemning spirit, an extraordinary safeguard is enacted: if all the judges unanimously vote to convict, the defendant is acquitted:

“Rav Kahana says: In a Sanhedrin where all the judges saw fit to convict the defendant in a case of capital law, they acquit him. …It is since it is learned as a tradition that suspension of the trial overnight is necessary in order to create a possibility of acquittal. We do not issue a guilty verdict on the same day the evidence was heard, as perhaps over the course of the night one of the judges will think of a reason to acquit the defendant. But if all the judges saw fit to convict him, they will not see any further possibility to acquit him overnight, because there will not be anyone arguing for such a verdict. Consequently, he cannot be convicted, as he would not have the full process of advocacy.”

This ruling underscores the Torah’s commitment to ensuring a fair and thorough process in capital cases. The mandated suspension of judgment overnight creates space for reflection, allowing for the possibility of discovering mitigating factors or arguments for acquittal. Without dissent or debate, the system lacks a crucial mechanism to safeguard the defendant’s rights.

Sefer Daf al Daf (16b) raises an intriguing question based on this principle. The Gemara earlier (16b) describes Moshe Rabbeinu as having a unique status, as if he were the equivalent of the entire Sanhedrin of 71 judges. How then could Moshe adjudicate capital cases? If his singular decision were equivalent to the unanimous ruling of 71 judges, it would effectively bypass the requirement for deliberation overnight, depriving the defendant of the advocacy process.

Several answers are offered:

Regardless of the specific answer, this ruling highlights the vital importance of self-review, especially in matters of life and death. The process of pausing, reflecting, and revisiting decisions is essential not only in judicial contexts but also in everyday life.

Many decisions in relationships, parenting, and interpersonal dynamics carry a significance akin to life and death—whether literally, emotionally, or spiritually. This ethos teaches us to “sleep on” major decisions, particularly when we are most convinced of our position. The greater the certainty, the more cautious we should be in reexamining our conclusions and seeking possible alternatives.

18

Having a Right Does Not Always Make You Right

Our Gemara on Amud Beis discusses legal exemptions from the obligation to return lost items, focusing on situations where retrieval of the object would conflict with the dignity of the finder:

“You shall not see your brother’s ox or his sheep wandering and ignore them; you shall return them to your brother” (Deuteronomy 22:1).

The use of the unusual phrase “and ignore them,” rather than a more direct “do not ignore them,” implies there are circumstances when ignoring a lost item is permissible. The Gemara elaborates:

If the finder is an elderly person,........

© The Times of Israel (Blogs)