EXOD771 Do not answer ["rav" = many] [i.e., do not give your verdict] even upon the basis of a hundred identical opinions [but seek out the truth yourself]. (Yerushalmi Sanhedrin 4:7)

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD772 Do not answer ["rav" = the master]. Do not say: "It is enough for the servant to be as his master," but say what you think. (Tosefta Sanhedrin 3).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD773 Do not answer ["riv" = quarrel]. Whence is it derived that if eleven judges acquit, eleven convict, and one is undecided, he should incline only towards acquittal? From "and do not answer upon a quarrel" [i.e. (in an instance such as the above) do not render a harsh verdict] (Mechilta).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD774 All that we have written applies even if there is a single speaker or listener. However, if one joins a group of wicked people who are habitual lashon hara speakers in order to relate or listen to lashon hara, then he also violates the prohibition of לֹֽא־תִהְיֶ֥ה אַחֲרֵֽי־רַבִּ֖ים לְרָעֹ֑ת, “Do not follow the majority for evil" (Shemos 23:2). According to Rabbeinu Yonah (Shaarei Teshuvah 3:50), this prohibition cautions a person not to concur or associate with wrongdoers, even if they are numerous.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD778 Follow the majority. In any argument regarding Torah law, the opinion of the majority rules, for the truth lies with the majority of the Sages. Even if the majority failed to see the truth, we still must follow the majority’s view. If everyone were to fulfill the Torah according to his own determination of what is right and proper, we would wind up having many Torahs instead of one. Therefore, in every matter of law, we are commanded to follow the decision of the majority of our Sages, never swerving from it no matter what. Thereby, we have one Torah for all of us, and we can stand together strongly under its guidance. When we perform mitzvos according to the ruling of the majority opinion, we follow the Will of Hashem. If, God forbid, the Sages comprising the majority erred, we have not sinned, for all of the responsibility is theirs. One who does not follow in majority decision of the Sages is punished severely, for majority rule is the pillar upon which all of Torah leans.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD779 In capital punishment cases, do not convict on the strength of a majority of only one judge. In court cases involving offenses punishable by death, do not convict the accused on the basis of a majority of only one judge. A majority of at least two judges is required. On the other hand, the courts can rely on a majority of only one judge in order to acquit the accused, just as such a majority is sufficient in non-capital cases. In all that we do, we are obliged to emulate Hashem. Kindness is one of the Divine traits. Hashem goes beyond the strict letter of the law in His dealings with mankind. In court, therefore, when a life is at stake, we must be more ready to acquit than to convict. Therefore, while a majority of only one judge suffices to acquit, a majority of at least two is required to convict. More certainty is required, for once a person is put to death, there is no reversing the court's action.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD780 In cases of capital punishment, he who originally argued in the defendant’s favor cannot later argue against him. The verse teaches us several laws about Jewish court procedures in cases involving offenses punishable by death: (1) A judge must not rule a certain way simply because a judge of higher standing rules that way. Similarly, a judge must not simply follow the majority. His ruling must be based upon his own understanding and weighing of the evidence. Similarly, if he thinks of a point that to him seems relevant to the case, he is not allowed to remain silent about it. Neither is he allowed to dismiss the thought and rule only on the basis of other points that his fellow judges mentioned in the deliberations. (2) A judge who originally argued for acquittal cannot later argue to convict. (3) The first argument offered in the deliberation should not be in favor of convicting the accused. Rather, the judges should try to first present an argument for acquittal. (4) The first argument cannot come from the most prestigious judge on the court, lest other judges submit and defer to his opinion. Rather, the deliberations must open with statements from the court's least prestigious judge. Key concepts: If a judge were allowed to follow the thinking of one of his fellow judges, without weighing the facts of the case himself, it could happen that a case would be decided on the basis of only one judge’s opinion. Perhaps every judge on the court would follow the thinking of just one of them! Hashem does not want anyone to be put to death on the basis of just one man's opinion. All of the above-mentioned laws derived from this verse show Divine compassion on the person being tried, for Hashem has compassion on all of His creations, as a father has compassion on his sons. The elements discussed above are not activated in court procedures concerning money matters, however, because money and property can always be returned.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD775 "You must not follow the majority to do evil" [this verse]. We have herein been admonished not to verbally strengthen the hands of sinners; and also not to associate ourselves with those who concur with wrongdoing, similar to what the pasuk says (Yeshayahu 8:12), "Do not say to join to everything that this people says regarding rebellion" [i.e., even though you are in the minority (Rashi)].

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD777 Because the biblical ideals of charity, love of neighbor, and the sanctity of human life have for so long pervaded the Western world influencing people such as Bertrand Russell ... [thus, Russell, a lifelong political dissident, used to recall the words written on the flyleaf of his parents' family Bible [this verse)], people often don't realize that these notions came into the world through the doctrine of ethical monotheism introduced by the Hebrew Bible more than 3,000 years ago. But take away the divine foundations for teachings such as "Love your neighbor as yourself" (the basis for the Golden Rule), and they make no sense. As John Locke wrote in 1690: "Should that most unshaken rule of morality and foundation of all social virtue, 'That one should do as he would be done unto,' be proposed to one who has never heard of it before… may he not without any absurdity ask the reason why?" (Essay Concerning Human Understanding).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

EXOD776 [Rabbi Eliezer] retorted to them: “If the ruling is with me-- it will be proved from heaven.” A Heavenly Voice resounded and it said: “What do you want from R. Eliezer? The rulings agree with him everywhere.” R. Joshua stood to his feet and said: “It is not in Heaven.” What does “It is not in heaven” mean? R. Jeremiah said: “The Torah was already given at Mount Sinai. We don't consider the Heavenly Voice. It was already written at Mount Sinai in the Torah, “Incline to the majority” (Exodus 23:2). R. Nathan met Elijah and said to him: “What did the Holy One, Blessed be He, do in that hour?” He said to him: “He laughed, and he said, ‘My children have defeated me, my children have defeated me.’” [Baba Metsia 59b] Eliezer battles with the others about the oven [of Akhnai-AJL], arguing with ‘supernatural’ evidence. He finally summons a Heavenly Voice that the other sages reject as well. But the sages argue that the Torah is given to human interpreters, and thus the “author’ has no longer any privilege in interpreting it. The story continues, with God delighted to be beaten in argument by the sages. But the story appears in the context of the topic of what is oppressed with words, because Eliezer is then excommunicated and is thus oppressed. The details are worth pursuing (Chapter 9). The responsibilities, even in winning the argument against Eliezer, are so extreme that his loss causes others’ deaths.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT