Aligned sentence by sentence
. . , , , , , , .
[The opening words belong to the close of the previous chapter's commentary.] "…with you," and the law is according to the Sages. As for his statement that there is "a body that convicts and a body that acquits": the meaning is that one body declares "acquitted"—and this is the body that acquits him—and another body declares "liable"—and this is the convicting body; and the death penalty is not incurred unless those who convict exceed those who acquit by two. Hence the addition of two is required, so that there may be a body that acquits, a body of two that convicts—and since a court may not be of even number, one more is added, making three—added to the two bodies.
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , .
As for the statement of the Rabbis that there are one hundred and twenty: it is explained in the Talmud (BT Sanhedrin 17b) that this number is reached as follows—a lesser Sanhedrin of twenty-three; three rows of twenty-three, namely sixty-nine; the ten men of leisure of the synagogue—these being people who have no occupation other than the service of Heaven, that is, study and the upkeep of synagogues; two scribes; two attendants; two litigants; two witnesses; two conspiratorial witnesses; two who refute the conspiratorial witnesses; two collectors of charity; three for the distribution of charity; a skilled physician; a notary; and a teacher of children—thus one hundred and twenty.
. . . .
R. Nehemiah holds that the lowest rank among those appointed is the officers of tens, and that twenty-three judges are officers of tens over two hundred and thirty men. And the law is not according to R. Nehemiah.
[]
Mishnah 1
, , .
His statement "testifies": not every form of testimony is meant, but rather testimony that pertains to the sovereign alone, on account of the eminence of his rank.
, .
His statement "they are hidden and he is revealed" means that he does not walk mingled among the people; rather, they go before him and screen him off, and he alone is set apart in their midst.
. . .
Upon this turns the view of R. Yehuda, who holds that, out of the anguish of mourning, death may draw near to him and he may contract corpse-impurity. R. Meir holds that, on account of the eminence of his rank—since all the people gaze upon him—he is not permitted to do this. And the law is according to R. Yehuda.
[]
Mishnah 2
.
The one who speaks to the people when he comforts them says "be consoled."
, . , .
The explanation of "mavrin" is that they provide him the mourner's meal. And "sofsel" is a small chair.
[]
Mishnah 3
, , .
This applies only to the kings of Israel, since they transgressed against [the proper conduct of] kingship: they do not prefer humility and lowliness, nor do they bear with the demands of justice. The kings of the House of David, however, both judge and are judged, for they are versed in justice, and humility is no burden upon them—for their kingship is legitimate and their humility does not diminish it.
, .
Concerning the House of David Scripture says, "Thus says the LORD: Execute justice in the morning" (Jeremiah 21:12); and David, peace be upon him, was himself among the members of the Great Sanhedrin.
, , , , .
The law is according to R. Yehuda in his statement that "the king performs the rite of levirate refusal," [meaning the case of] the widow of a king; but as for levirate refusal and levirate marriage [where he himself would be a party], one does not heed him, for that would be a degradation to him—"and she spits in his face" (Deuteronomy 25:9)—and inasmuch as the refusal-rite is barred to him, levirate marriage too is barred. And it is a principle of ours that "a king who forgoes the honor due him—his honor is not forgone"; therefore one does not heed him.
. , . , . .
The explanation of "his palatial chambers" is "his hall." "To appease": to placate the people and make known to them that he had no personal stake in his execution. And "dargash" is a kind of chair or couch, larger than a "sofsel." And the law is not according to R. Yehuda.
[]
Mishnah 4
, . .
"Optional war" is warfare against the rest of the nations, other than the seven nations and the war against Amalek, as we explained in the eighth chapter of Sotah. Among the conditions of optional war is that it may be undertaken only by a king and a Sanhedrin.
, . , .
The explanation of "none may protest" is that one may not object. And "he takes a portion at the head" means that he takes half of all the spoil plundered from the people, in addition to whatever belonged to that gentile ruler—for the property of the ruler belongs to [the conquering] sovereign.
[]
Mishnah 5
, ,
It is permitted for the king to multiply as many horses as he wishes for mounting the armies, and likewise to increase the horses in his camp in order to overawe the enemy. God prohibited to him only that he keep idle horses in the stables, set aside for him to ride on some occasion or to be led before him in the manner of the kings of the nations; rather, it is not permitted to him to keep more than a single horse