Why do Jews who go to Beis Din to resolve a financial disagreement, often use "lawyers" (to'ein) to argue their respective sides. If the dayanim are capable shouldn't they be able to just heard the sides and make a decision based on the Torah? Also, doesn't this lead to the richer side being able to hire the better "to'ein" which makes it unfair?

  • why do you assume the daynim know all the shittos? – sam Jan 29 '17 at 0:02
  • too broad. jews not judaism. opinion based. – mevaqesh Jan 29 '17 at 21:25
  • If this were edited so that it were about the place of lay tribunals in the Jewish legal system, by which each side appoints a person to argue their case, it would be a great question. (And very answerable as well: see Menachem Elon's Mishpat Ivri). – Shimon bM Jan 30 '17 at 1:09

You happen to have a very good point,in fact the Shulchan Aruch CM 13:3 and the Sma 12 write that the dayanim should really only hear from the person himself and not from a toein.

In this article Rav Hershel Schacter explains in detail how corrupt the toein system is and how people are making a fortune off this "profession ".


|improve this answer|||||

The point is that the individuals are often too nervous to actually show the facts of the case. Also, they are afraid that if the dayanim are not given all the arguments by their side, that they will not get a fair hearing. Part of this is the influence of the American court system. The dayanim are expected to be able to discount the to'ein when necessary.

|improve this answer|||||

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .