Avot237

1:
Mishnah 10 is an obvious continuation of mishnah 9; not just because they both have the same author, but also because their content is linked. In Mishnah 9 Rabbi Yishma'el emphasized how reticent a sage should be to sit in judgement or to offer an halakhic opinion. But, nevertheless, judgements must be rendered and halakhic opinions must be offered: without them Jewish communal life would be impossible.

2:
There are two kinds of legal procedure in rabbinic law: dinei mamonot and dinei nefashot. For a much fuller discussion see Sanhedrin 001 and the shiurim that follow. For our present purposes it is sufficient to say that dinei mamonot refers to cases in which should judgement be rendered against the defendant the punishment would be expressed in monetary terms, a fine for example. Dinei nefashot refers to cases in which should the prisoner be found guilty he might forfeit his life.

3.
Cases of dinei nefashot must be heard before a panel of twenty-three fully qualified judges (who weigh both matters of fact and matters of law). Cases of dinei mamonot, however, are heard before a panel of three judges, two (and possibly three) of whom may be lay arbitrators. However, it was recognized that publicly recognized rabbinic authorities could be given licence to render judgement alone. This meant that the litigants (the plaintiff and the defendant together) could choose whether to submit their claims to a panel of arbitrators who need not necessarily be learned in the law or to prefer the judgement of a single qualified justice.

4:
Ideally, even a panel of arbitration should contain one member who was an halakhic expert. Thus the sages could not opt out of sitting in judgement; this means that Rabbi Yishma'el, in the previous mishnah, was speaking against those who were eager to sit in judgement over others; he was not recommending that his fellow sages desist from sitting in judgement altogether. They would have to bear the burden of sitting in dinei nefashot and should sit in dinei mamonot when required to do so. (We should note, however, that the Romans had taken dinei nefashot out of the hands of rabbinic courts more than a century and a half before the time of Rabbi Yishma'el.)

5:
Our present mishnah deals with how the sages should comport themselves when required to sit in a case of dinei mamonot. Rabbi Yishma'el offers two pieces of advice to his colleagues. Firstly: even though you may have received a licence from the Jewish authorities to sit in judgement alone as a mumĥeh la-rabbim it is preferable that you sit as one of a panel of three. Only God, the ultimate One, judges completely alone. Mortal man is liable to error.

6:
This tendency to involve as many as possible in rendering halakhic decisions was often taken to extremes. For instance, the Gemara [Sanhedrin 7a] tells us that when Rav Ashi was required to decide whether an animal's carcass was kosher or not he would assemble all the butchers of his town of Mata Meĥasya, saying that it was best that they all share the responsibility of decision.

7:
But even when the sage is joined by others to share the responsibility of judgement he should not force his opinion on his fellow adjudicators (who might even be lay people): they have the right of independent opinion just as much as he does, and, after he has indicated to them what he thinks the law demands in the case being heard, he must leave them to make their own decision, and judgement will be rendered according to the majority opinion.

8:
Rabbi Yishma'el is pleading for humility and reticence in the administration of halakhah. Sometimes these are characteristics which are sadly missing from some of our modern sages.