When the Sanhedrin stopped judging capital cases TB Sanhedrin 41

Yesterday I explained why Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai- רַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי was simply called ben Zakkai in the Mishna. Today’s daf TB Sanhedrin 41 does the math to show that his statement was recorded when he was only a student.

“The Gemara clarifies: Who is the ben Zakkai mentioned in the mishna? If we say it is Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Zakkai, was he a member in a Sanhedrin that judged capital cases? But isn’t it taught in a baraita: All the years of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Zakkai were 120 years. For forty of those years he dealt in business [biferakmatya], for forty of those years he studied, and for forty of those years he taught and guided the Jewish people.

“The Gemara continues its question: And it is taught in a baraita: Forty years before the destruction of the Second Temple, the Sanhedrin was exiled from the Chamber of Hewn Stone and sat in the store near the Temple Mount. And Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Avudimi says: The intent of the statement concerning the relocation of the Sanhedrin is to say that they no longer judged laws of fines. The Gemara asks: Does it enter your mind to say that they no longer judged laws of fines? It is known that the Sanhedrin would judge laws of fines for hundreds of years after the destruction of the Temple. Rather, he must have said that the Sanhedrin no longer judged cases of capital law. Once the Sanhedrin left the Chamber of Hewn Stone, the court’s power to judge capital cases was nullified.

“The Gemara concludes its question: And since as we learned in a mishna (Sukka 41a): Once the Temple was destroyed, Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai instituted an ordinance that the mitzva of lulav should be performed even in the rest of the country for seven days in commemoration of the Temple, it is clear that he was in a position of prominence after the destruction of the Temple. Since the Sanhedrin ceased judging cases of capital law forty years before the destruction of the Temple, and Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai was in a position of prominence for only forty years, he could not have been a judge in a capital case

 “The Gemara suggests: Rather, one can say that it was merely a different person named ben Zakkai, not the well-known Sage of that name. The Gemara comments: So too, it is reasonable to say this, as if it enters your mind that this was Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai, would Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi call him ben Zakkai, without any title? He must have been referring to someone else.

“The Gemara asks: But isn’t it taught in a baraita explicitly: An incident occurred, and Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai examined the witnesses with regard to the stems of figs? This proves that the Sage in question is Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai. Rather, one can say that at that time, when this incident occurred, Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai was a student sitting before his teacher, and in those years the Sanhedrin was in its place and judged cases of capital law. And he said a matter in the course of examining the witnesses, and his reasoning was logical to them, and the judges asked his question, and Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi established it in the mishna in his name. When he was studying, they called him ben Zakkai, in the manner that they would call a student sitting before his teacher, and when he was teaching others they called him Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai. In terms of the baraita and the mishna, when they called him ben Zakkai in the Mishna, that was based on the name that he was called initially. And when they called him Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai in the other baraita, that was based on the name that he was called now.” (Sefaria.org translation)

According to Rashi and others once the Sanhedrin was exiled from the Chamber of Hewn Stone (lishkat hagazit-לִשְׁכַּת הָגָזִית), the section of the Holy Temple in Jerusalem, the no longer adjudicated capital cases. Others hold that where the Sanhedrin was situated was inconsequential. The Sanhedrin decide no longer to adjudicate capital cases. The Meiri also holds that where the Sanhedrin was situated was inconsequential; however, to adjudicate capital cases the Sanhedrin needed a fixed permanent place. Once the Sanhedrin was exiled from the Chamber of Hewn Stone, it no longer had a fixed permanent place. Consequently, they no longer adjudicated capital cases.

If the Sanhedrin stopped judging capital cases 40 years before the destruction of the Temple in the year 70 CE, they stop judging capital cases by the year 30 CE. Consequently, the Sanhedrin could not have sentenced Jesus to death as recorded in the Christian testament. The Gospels were written at least 100 years after Jesus’s death. To blame the most powerful leader of the most powerful nation, the Roman Emperor and Rome, in the world guilty of killing God was not the wisest course of action. Not to incur the wrath of the Roman Empire, the authors of the Gospels shifted the blame to the Sanhedrin and all the Jewish people creating the anti-Semitic slur of deicide.