Study Makkot folio 7A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Apropos disqualified witnesses, the Talmud relates: Two people called Ile’a and Tuviyya, who signed as witnesses on a promissory note, were relatives of the guarantor of the loan. Rav Pappa thought to say that since vis-à-vis the borrower and lender these witnesses are distant and are not related,
Mishnah: This Mishnah continues to discuss the matter of testimony in the case of one who is liable to be executed. Concerning one whose verdict was delivered and he was sentenced to death and he fled, and he then came before the same court that sentenced him, they do not overturn his verdict and r
The Mishnah continues: The mitzva to establish a Sanhedrin with the authority to administer capital punishments is in effect both in Eretz Yisrael and outside Eretz Yisrael. A Sanhedrin that executes a transgressor once in 7 years is characterized as a destructive tribunal. Since the Sanhedrin would
Talmud: The Talmud infers: It is in the case of one who comes before the same court that they do not overturn the verdict, but if one comes before a different court they overturn the verdict and retry the case. The Talmud asks: Isn’t it taught in the latter clause of the Mishnah: Any place where tw
Abaye said: This apparent contradiction is not difficult, as here, in the first clause of the Mishnah, from which it was inferred that the second court overturns the initial verdict, it is referring to a case where the initial verdict was outside Eretz Yisrael and the defendant came before a cour