Choshen Mishpat - Daily Recordings

Topic: The Tur’s ruling that פשרה requires a קניין , the question of why the claimant needs a קניין , and the dispute between the RiD and the Rosh.

Topic: Why פשרה requires a קניין from both parties, even though ordinary מחילה — forgiving a debt — may not require a קניין .

Topic: The second issue in Choshen Mishpat 12:7 — why פשרה requires a קנין , a formal act of legal commitment, whereas ordinary judgment does not.

Topic: The first issue in Choshen Mishpat 12:7 — how many judges are needed to make a binding פשרה ?

Topic: The prohibition against forcing another person into a compromise by delaying payment or withholding property that rightfully belongs to him.

Topic: The authority of a dayan to rule “like a compromise” when the facts cannot be fully clarified and a strict ruling would be unreliable.

Topic: The authority of Beit Din to make a compromise involving orphans’ property, even without the orphans’ consent, when it is for their benefit.

Topic: The Rema’s discussion of whether Beit Din can compel someone to act לפנים משורת הדין — beyond the strict letter of the law.

Topic: Even after גמר דין — the final ruling — compromise may still be possible in certain ways: through someone outside Beit Din, to avoid an oath, or through a fully voluntary agreement between the parties.

Topic: The Shulchan Aruch on the mitzvah to offer פשרה — compromise — the need for fairness within compromise, and the dispute over how late compromise may still be offered.

Topic: The Tur’s formulation of the mitzvah to offer פשרה — compromise — and the discussion of whether the judge should present compromise before strict law or after it.

Topic: The Rambam’s ruling on פשרה — compromise — especially when it is a mitzvah to offer compromise and when it becomes too late to do so.

Topic: The dispute between Rashi and Tosafot about the latest point at which Beit Din may offer פשרה — compromise — and the exception of compromise to avoid an oath.

Topic: The halacha follows Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korcha that there is a mitzvah to offer compromise, but the Gemara limits when compromise may be offered.

Topic: The beginning of the discussion of פשרה — compromise in Beit Din — and the dispute among the Tannaim whether compromise is permitted, prohibited, or a mitzvah.

Topic: The ruling of the Shulchan Aruch and Rema on לא תגורו מפני איש , and the later discussion of when fear, danger, or pikuach nefesh may justify a judge withdrawing from a case.

Topic: Two further qualifications in the Beit Yosef and Darkei Moshe : when a judge must take a case despite concern, and when real danger may justify withdrawal.

Topic: The Rashba’s responsum on a Beit Din threatened by a litigant, and whether לא תגורו מפני איש requires judges to face actual danger.

Topic: The source and scope of the Rambam’s ruling that a publicly appointed judge may not withdraw from a case out of fear, and the dispute over whether לא תגורו requires a judge to enter actual danger.

Topic: The Gemara’s limitation of לא תגורו מפני איש — when a judge may withdraw from a case because of fear, and when he may not.

Topic: Rabbeinu Yonah’s understanding of לא תגורו מפני איש — the obligation of a judge not to fear threats when administering justice.

The Prohibition of Judicial Fear

Representation, Dignity, and the Form of a Summons

Additional Details About נידוי and סרבנות

When Is the נידוי Removed?