2 added 24 characters in body
source | link

Learning the [beginning of the] Sanhedrin tractate is difficult for me to see the never-ending disagreements between the Tannoyim and/or Ammoroyim (any combination) about the very procedure of jurisprudence. For example, the number of judges, odd/even number, what the majority is needed and how to add additional judges.

Keep in mind, that all of those discords were in the times when the SanhedringSanhedrin was functional (even after the destruction of the Temple). Also, keep in mind that practically all the Halochos we accept today were instituted hundreds of years after the Gemmorah.

I was wondering, given those disputes, how judging someone in Sanhedrin was possible if there was no agreement on the procedure? Should they vote on the procedure before the trial?

Learning the [beginning of the] Sanhedrin tractate is difficult for me to see the never-ending disagreements between the Tannoyim and Ammoroyim about the very procedure of jurisprudence. For example, the number of judges, odd/even number, what majority is needed and how to add additional judges.

Keep in mind, that all of those discords were in the times when the Sanhedring was functional (even after the destruction of the Temple). Also, keep in mind that practically all the Halochos we accept today were instituted hundreds of years after the Gemmorah.

I was wondering, given those disputes, how judging someone in Sanhedrin was possible if there was no agreement on the procedure? Should they vote on the procedure before the trial?

Learning the [beginning of the] Sanhedrin tractate is difficult for me to see the never-ending disagreements between the Tannoyim and/or Ammoroyim (any combination) about the very procedure of jurisprudence. For example, the number of judges, odd/even number, what the majority is needed and how to add additional judges.

Keep in mind, that all of those discords were in the times when the Sanhedrin was functional (even after the destruction of the Temple). Also, keep in mind that practically all the Halochos we accept today were instituted hundreds of years after the Gemmorah.

I was wondering, given those disputes, how judging someone in Sanhedrin was possible if there was no agreement on the procedure? Should they vote on the procedure before the trial?

1
source | link

How Sanhedrin was possible if there was no agreement about the juridical procedures?

Learning the [beginning of the] Sanhedrin tractate is difficult for me to see the never-ending disagreements between the Tannoyim and Ammoroyim about the very procedure of jurisprudence. For example, the number of judges, odd/even number, what majority is needed and how to add additional judges.

Keep in mind, that all of those discords were in the times when the Sanhedring was functional (even after the destruction of the Temple). Also, keep in mind that practically all the Halochos we accept today were instituted hundreds of years after the Gemmorah.

I was wondering, given those disputes, how judging someone in Sanhedrin was possible if there was no agreement on the procedure? Should they vote on the procedure before the trial?