Study Sanhedrin folio 41B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
וקבעוה בשמיה. כי הוה למד, ״בן זכאי״ הוה קרי ליה, כתלמיד היושב לפני רבו. כי הוה לימד, הוה קרי ליה ״רבן יוחנן בן זכאי״. כי קרי ליה ״בן זכאי״ – על שם דמעיקרא, וכי קרי ליה ״רבן יוחנן בן זכאי״ – על שם דהשתא.
and R' Yehuda HaNasi established it in the Mishnah in his name. When he was studying, they called him ben Zakkai, in the manner that they would call a student sitting before his teacher, and when he was teaching others they called him Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai. In terms of the baraita and the Mishnah, when they called him ben Zakkai in the Mishnah, that was based on the name that he was called initially. And when they called him Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai in the other baraita, that was based on the name that he was called now.
מעשה ובדק כו׳. מה בין חקירות כו׳. מאי ״אפילו שנים אומרים״? פשיטא! כי אמר אחד ״איני יודע״ – עדותן קיימת, כי אמרי בי תרי נמי עדותן קיימת!
§ The Mishnah teaches: An incident occurred, and ben Zakkai examined the witnesses about the stems of figs. What is the difference between interrogations and examinations? In the case of interrogations, if one of the witnesses says: I do not know the answer, their testimony is void immediately. In the case of examinations, if one says: I do not know the answer, and even if two witnesses say: We do not know the answer, their testimony still stands. The Talmud asks: What is the meaning of: Even if two say? Isn’t it obvious? The Mishnah already stated that when one witness says: I do not know, their testimony stands, indicating that knowledge of the answers to these types of questions is not required. Accordingly, when two witnesses say that they do not know, their testimony stands as well. What is the novelty of this ruling?
אמר רב ששת: ארישא קאי, והכי קאמר: בחקירות, אפילו שנים אומרים ״ידענו״ ואחד אומר ״איני יודע״ – עדותן בטילה. כמאן? כרבי עקיבא, דמקיש שלשה לשנים.
Rav Sheshet said: This clause is referring to the first clause of the Mishnah, and this is what it is saying: With regard to the interrogations, even if two witnesses say: We know, and one additional witness says: I do not know, their testimony is void. In accordance with whose opinion is this Mishnah written? In accordance with the opinion of R' Akiva, who compares in all court proceedings 3 witnesses to two, holding that just as two witnesses must testify a fully valid testimony, so it is with 3. Therefore, if the third witness does not know the answer to an interrogation, the testimony of all 3 is void.