Study Sanhedrin folio 30A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
and all of the formulations of an enactment of the court were written in it. But only two were signed on it, and the following statement was not written in it: We were convened in a session of 3 judges, and one of the judges is no longer here, as he died or left for another reason. There was therefo
Ravina thought to say that this is a case in which the principle of Reish Lakish, that witnesses do not sign a document unless the action was performed appropriately, applies. Rav Natan bar Ami said to him: This is what we say in the name of Rava: In any cases like this, we are concerned for the p
Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak says: If it was written in the document: We, the members of the court, convened, it is unnecessary for the deed to further state that one of the judges is no longer there, as a standard court consists of 3 judges.
The Talmud asks: But perhaps it was an impudent court, as Shmuel says: With regard to two judges who convened a tribunal and judged, their verdict is a binding verdict; but because they contravened the rabbinic ordinance mandating that a court must be composed of 3 judges, they are called an impude
The Talmud asks: But perhaps the rabbis of the court of Rav Ashi hold like Shmuel, that the verdict of two judges is binding, and they convened an impudent court. The Talmud answers: It is a document in which it is written: And we said to Rabbana Ashi, and Rabbana Ashi said to us. Rav Ashi himself