Study Sanhedrin folio 4A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
And how would the Rabbis respond to R' Yehuda HaNasi’s proof? They would say that although the term: “Shall condemn” is pronounced as a plural verb, it is written in a way that could also be read in the singular. Consequently, one cannot derive a requirement for more than one judge from there.
§ The dispute between R' Yehuda HaNasi and the rabbis is explained as an example of the more general question of whether the written consonantal text or the vocalization of the Torah is authoritative. As R' Yitzḥak bar Yosei says that R' Yoḥanan says: With regard to R' Yehuda HaNasi, R' Yehuda ben
The Talmud explains the basis for R' Yoḥanan’s assertion with regard to each of the tanna’im that he mentioned: With regard to R' Yehuda HaNasi, the proof is that which we have just said, with regard to the interpretation of the verse: “He whom the court shall condemn” (Exodus 22:8) deriving a requ
And with regard to R' Yehuda ben Roetz, it is as it is taught in a baraita: His students asked R' Yehuda ben Roetz: The verse states: “But if she gives birth to a female, then she shall be unclean for two weeks, as in her menstrual impurity; and she shall then continue in the blood of purification
R' Yehuda ben Roetz said to them: It can be proven that this is not the halakha, as the Torah deemed her impure and deemed her pure when she gave birth to a male, and deemed her impure and deemed her pure when she gave birth to a female. Just as when it deemed her pure for 33 days after the initial