Sanhedrin 43 - January 29, 29 Tevet

Today's daf is sponsored by Harriet Hartman in honor of her grandson Oriya Hartman's marriage to Shira Shahar Katzav. "May they live long lives together inspired by Torah and love."  Today’s daf is sponsored by Marcia Baum in loving memory of Helena K Baum, Chaya Chana Alta bat Chana v'Yekutiel Yehuda on her 9th yahrzeit. "Mom was a strong proponent of women’s Torah study long before it became mainstream. She studied at the Drisha Institute with women half her age. She is missed every day by those of us who loved her and we hope we are making her proud!"  Today's daf is sponsored in memory of Shayna Malka bat Shlomo Yosef on her yahrzeit. Rav Ashi derives a third source for the requirement that stoning executions must take place outside the city, finding support in the verses discussing the blasphemer. All basic execution expenses are covered by communal funds. However, two questions arise about additional costs: First, regarding the wages of those stationed outside the court to assist potential last-minute defenders of the condemned, and second, concerning the cost of wine and frankincense given to the convicted person to reduce their suffering before execution. The Gemara resolves the second question using a verse from Proverbs, establishing that these measures must be funded by the community since it bears collective responsibility for minimizing the condemned's suffering. Rav Acha bar Huna poses a question to Rav Sheshet: How should we handle a case where a student rises to present evidence for acquittal but becomes unable to speak before explaining his reasoning? Rav Sheshet initially dismisses this as obvious - since no argument was actually presented, it cannot be considered. Despite Rav Acha's persistence, the Gemara attempts to resolve this by comparing it to a case where a student presented an argument for acquittal and then died, whose vote was counted. This might suggest that only fully explained arguments can be counted, but this conclusion is ultimately rejected. If someone being led to execution claims to have new evidence that could overturn their conviction, the court must evaluate this claim - but only if it appears to have merit. However, a braita teaches that during the first two times the condemned makes such claims, they must be heard regardless of apparent merit. Rav Pappa reconciles this with the Mishna's stricter standard, and the Gemara explains why later claims are treated differently. Abaye adds that after the first two attempts, Torah scholars accompany the condemned specifically to evaluate whether any new claims have substance. A portion of the Gemara discussing Jesus of Nazareth's execution was later censored and removed from the manuscripts. Before execution, the condemned is asked to confess their sins. This practice is derived from the biblical story of Achan. The Gemara analyzes this story in detail, deriving both practical laws and ethical teachings from its verses. This leads to a broader discussion about collective responsibility within the Jewish community - specifically, to what extent are Jews responsible for both the public and private transgressions of their fellow Jews?