The Shawshank Redemption TB Sanhedrin 25

The Mishnah on daf  TB Sanhedrin 24b lists people who are ineligible to become witnesses. The common denominator of these people is their pursuit of ill-gotten gains. The rabbis were afraid that their love of money was so great that their testimony could be bought; consequently, they were ineligible witnesses.

One of the sub themes of the movie “the Shawshank Redemption” is when can society determine a convict is rehabilitated. Throughout the movie the character Red appears before the parole board and tries to convince them that he is rehabilitated. Only at the end of the movie does he convince them that he truly is a different person now. https://www.google.com/search?q=shawshank+redemption+clips+youtube&oq=Clips+from+the+Shawshank+redemption&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUqCggIEAAYgAQYogQyBggAEEUYOTIICAEQABgWGB4yDQgCEAAYhgMYgAQYigUyDQgDEAAYhgMYgAQYigUyDQgEEAAYhgMYgAQYigUyDQgFEAAYhgMYgAQYigUyDQgGEAAYhgMYgAQYigUyCggHEAAYgAQYogQyCggIEAAYgAQYogTSAQoxMzkwNGowajE1qAIIsAIB&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:d9500fab,vid:eBsaW4VyAZ8,st:0

Only God is able to see within a person’s heart and determine whether he or she is a changed person. Society can only try its best to see whether the transgressor has been rehabilitated. The goal ultimately I believe is to reintegrate the transgressor back into society. On two different places in today’s daf TB Sanhedrin 25 do the rabbis describes what real teshuvah, repentance, looks like.

“There was a certain slaughterer about whom it was discovered that a tereifa, an animal with a wound that would have caused it to die within twelve months, emerged from his possession. In other words, he sold tereifa meat without informing the customers of its status. Rav Naḥman disqualified him from bearing witness and removed him from his position as a slaughterer. The slaughterer subsequently went and grew his fingernails and his hair out of remorse over his actions. Rav Naḥman thought to deem him fit again for bearing witness, as he clearly repented, and once someone repents for his sin, his status as a valid witness is restored.

“Rava said to Rav Naḥman: Perhaps he is employing artifice, pretending to repent in order to be reinstated as a slaughterer. Rather, what is his remedy? It is in accordance with the statement of Rav Idi bar Avin; as Rav Idi bar Avin says: One who is suspected of selling tereifot to others has no remedy to restore his fitness to bear witness until he goes to a locale where they do not recognize him and returns a lost item of substantial value that he finds, or removes his own tereifa meat of significant value from his possession. These actions demonstrate that he has repented, as he is willing to lose money for a mitzva. By contrast, if he does so in a place where he is recognized his fitness in not reinstated based on these actions, as perhaps he performed them only in order to be reinstated.” (daf 25a, Sefaria.org translation)

“The Gemara raises an objection to the opinion that the expression: Those who fly pigeons, refers to an ara, from a baraita: With regard to the expression one who plays with dice, these are ones who play with pispasim, which are dice of marble or other types of stone. But the Sages did not mean to say that only one who plays with pispasim is disqualified from bearing witness, but rather even one who plays with nutshells or pomegranate shells is disqualified.

"And when is their repentance accepted, so that they may resume being fit to bear witness? Once they break their pispasim and repent of them completely, abandoning this occupation entirely, where they do not do this even for nothing, i.e., they do not play even without betting.

“The baraita continues: The expression: One who lends with interest, is referring to both the lender and the borrower. Both are disqualified. And when is their repentance accepted? Once they tear their promissory notes and repent of them completely, abandoning this occupation entirely, where they do not lend with interest even to a gentile.

"The expression: And those who fly pigeons, is referring to those who induce the pigeons to behave in this manner, i.e., they train them. And the Sages did not mean to say that only those who fly pigeons are disqualified; rather, even those who do this with a domesticated animal, an undomesticated animal, or any type of bird are disqualified. And when is their repentance accepted? Once they break their fixtures [pigmeihen] upon which they stand the competing animals, and repent completely, abandoning this occupation entirely, where they do not do this even in the wilderness, where there is no one from whom to steal.

“The expression: Merchants who trade in the produce of the Sabbatical Year, is referring to those who do business with the produce of the Sabbatical Year. And when is their repentance accepted? Once another Sabbatical Year occurs and they refrain from selling its produce or from assuming ownership of such produce. "

The baraita continues: And Rabbi Neḥemya said: The Sages did not say that verbal repentance alone is sufficient for a merchant who traded in the produce of the Sabbatical Year to be reinstated as a valid witness; rather, returning the money is also necessary. How can one return the money he gained from selling produce of the Sabbatical Year? He says: I, so-and-so the son of so-and-so, gathered, i.e., profited, two hundred dinars from trading in the produce of the Sabbatical Year, and as I gained it improperly, this sum is hereby given as a gift to the poor.” (daf 25b, Sefaria.org translation)

Commentators wonder why these two descriptions of repentance are separated. What is the qualitative difference between the butcher and the rest of the ineligible witnesses? The Meiri writes that the qualitative difference between them is the difference between the public domain and the private domain. Until the butcher is found out, nobody knows that he is selling them treif meat. A kosher steak looks exactly like a non-kosher one. On the other hand, all the other people are transgressing in public. People see that they are gambling or doing business with sabbatical year produce. They are not hiding anything from the public. Because the butcher is sinning in secret, the proof of his rehabilitation is greater than the person transgressing in public.

We too have the same quandary as our rabbis did when comes to accepting criminals back into our society. Two cases come to mind. The first one is the rabbi who put a video camera in the mikvah to film women as they immerse themselves. The second case is the sexual child abuser. They may have done their time, but how do we truly know when a person has done teshuvah and has been rehabilitated? I have no good answer for that question.