Testimony Chapter 21

עֵדִים שֶׁהֵעִידוּ שֶׁפְּלוֹנִי גֵּרֵשׁ אִשְׁתּוֹ וְלֹא נָתַן לָהּ כְּתֻבָּה וְהוּזַמּוּ. וַהֲלֹא בֵּין הַיּוֹם בֵּין לְמָחָר אִם גֵּרֵשׁ סוֹפוֹ לִתֵּן כְּתֻבָּה. אוֹמְדִין כַּמָּה רוֹצֶה אָדָם לִתֵּן בִּכְתֻבָּתָהּ שֶׁל זוֹ שֶׁתִּמְכֹּר אוֹתָהּ בְּטוֹבַת הֲנָאָה וּמְשַׁלְּמִין דְּמֵי טוֹבַת הֲנָאָה זוֹ. וּמְשַׁעֲרִין בְּאִשָּׁה וּבִכְתֻבָּתָהּ. שֶׁאִם הָאִשָּׁה הָיְתָה חוֹלָה אוֹ זְקֵנָה אוֹ שֶׁהָיָה שָׁלוֹם בֵּינָהּ לְבֵין בַּעְלָהּ אֵין דְּמֵי הַכְּתֻבָּה כְּשֶׁתִּמָּכֵר כְּמוֹ דָּמֶיהָ אִם הָיְתָה הָאִשָּׁה בְּרִיאָה וּקְטַנָּה אִם יֵשׁ בֵּינֵיהֶן קְטָטָה שֶׁזּוֹ קְרוֹבָה מִן הַגֵּרוּשִׁין וּרְחוֹקָה מִן הַמִּיתָה. וְכֵן אֵין טוֹבַת הֲנָאָה שֶׁל כְּתֻבָּה הַמְרֻבָּה לְפִי טוֹבַת הֲנָאָה שֶׁל כְּתֻבָּה הַמּוּעֶטֶת. שֶׁאִם הָיְתָה כְּתֻבָּתָהּ אֶלֶף זוּז הֲרֵי הִיא נִמְכֶּרֶת בְּטוֹבַת הֲנָאָה בְּמֵאָה. וְאִם הָיְתָה מֵאָה אֵינָהּ נִמְכֶּרֶת בַּעֲשָׂרָה אֶלָּא בְּפָחוֹת. דְּבָרִים אֵלּוּ כְּפִי מַה שֶּׁיְּשַׁעֲרוּ הַדַּיָּנִים:

The following rule applies when witnesses testify that so-and-so divorced his wife and did not pay her the money due her by virtue of her ketubah and, afterwards, these witnesses were disqualified through hazamah. Now either today or tomorrow, when the husband divorces his wife, he must pay her the money due her by virtue of her ketubah. Hence we calculate how much a person would pay for the right to collect the money due this woman by virtue of her ketubah in the event she would be widowed or divorced and the witnesses are required to pay this amount. When calculating this amount, we take into consideration the state of the woman and the amount of her ketubah. If the woman is sick or old or there is peace between her and her husband, the value for which her ketubah will be sold will not be the same if she is young and healthy or there is strife between the couple. For such a woman is more likely to be divorced and less likely to die. Similarly, the amount to be received for a large ketubah is not the same as for a small ketubah. For example, if her ketubah is for 1000 zuz, it might be sold for 100. If it is for 100, it will not be sold for 10 but for less. These matters are dependent on the estimates of the judges.

הֵעִידוּ עַל זֶה שֶׁחַיָּב לִפְלוֹנִי אֶלֶף זוּז עַל מְנָת לִתֵּן מִכָּאן וְעַד שְׁלֹשִׁים יוֹם. וְהַלּוֶֹה אוֹמֵר עַד חָמֵשׁ שָׁנִים אַחַר הַשְּׁלֹשִׁים יוֹם. וְנִמְצְאוּ זוֹמְמִין. אוֹמְדִין כַּמָּה רוֹצֶה אָדָם לִתֵּן וְיִהְיוּ בְּיָדוֹ אֶלֶף זוּז חָמֵשׁ שָׁנִים וּמְשַׁלְּמִין כֵּן לַלּוֶֹה. וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּזֶה:

Similar principles apply in the following situation. Witnesses testify with regard to a person, saying that he is obligated to pay so-and-so 1000 zuz in 30 days. The borrower admits the debt, but says that it is not due until five years and 30 days. If the witnesses are disqualified through hazamah, we evaluate how much a person would pay to have 1000 zuz available to him for five years. This is the sum paid to the borrower. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.

הֵעִידוּ עַל שׁוֹרוֹ שֶׁל זֶה שֶׁנָּגַח וְנִמְצְאוּ זוֹמְמִין מְשַׁלְּמִין חֲצִי נֵזֶק. וְאִם אֵין הַשּׁוֹר שָׁוֶה חֲצִי נֵזֶק מְשַׁלְּמִין דְּמֵי הַשּׁוֹר בִּלְבַד שֶׁאֵין מְשַׁלֵּם חֲצִי נֵזֶק אֶלָּא מִגּוּפוֹ. לְפִיכָךְ אִם הֵעִידוּ עָלָיו שֶׁאָכַל פֵּרוֹת אוֹ שָׁבַר כֵּלִים בְּדֶרֶךְ הִלּוּכוֹ מְשַׁלְּמִין נֵזֶק שָׁלֵם. וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּזֶה:

When witnesses testify that a person's ox gored another ox and afterwards, the witnesses were disqualified through hazamah, they are required to pay half the damages. If the ox is not worth half the damages, they are required to pay only the value of the ox. For the fine of half of the damages must be paid only from the body of the goring ox itself. Therefore if they testified that the ox consumed produce or broke utensils while walking, the witnesses are required to pay the full amount of the loss. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.

הֵעִידוּ עַל פְּלוֹנִי שֶׁהִפִּיל שֵׁן עַבְדּוֹ וְאַחַר כָּךְ סִמֵּא אֶת עֵינוֹ וְהוּזַמּוּ. מְשַׁלְּמִין לָאָדוֹן דְּמֵי הָעֶבֶד וּדְמֵי עֵינוֹ. הֵעִידוּ שֶׁסִּמֵּא אֶת עֵינוֹ וְאַחַר כָּךְ הִפִּיל אֶת שִׁנּוֹ וְהוּזַמּוּ (וְאַחַר כָּךְ) וְנִמְצָא הַדָּבָר הֵפֶךְ שֶׁהָאָדוֹן הִפִּיל אֶת שִׁנּוֹ וְאַחַר כָּךְ סִמֵּא אֶת עֵינוֹ מְשַׁלְּמִין דְּמֵי עַיִן לָעֶבֶד. וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּזֶה:

When witnesses testify that a person knocked out the tooth of his servant and then blinded the servant's eye, if afterwards, the witnesses were disqualified through hazamah, they are required to pay the master the value of the servant and the value of his eye. A different rule applies if they testified that the master blinded the servant's eye and afterwards knocked out his tooth, the witnesses were disqualified through hazamah, and it was later discovered that the events occurred in the opposite order, the master knocked out his tooth and afterwards blinded him. The witnesses must pay the worth of the eye to the servant. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.

עֵדֵי קִנּוּי וּסְתִירָה שֶׁהוּזַמּוּ לוֹקִין. בָּא עֵד אֶחָד וְהֵעִיד שֶׁזִּנְּתָה אַחַר קִנּוּי וּסְתִירָה [וְנִמְצָא אוֹתוֹ הָעֵד זוֹמֵם מְשַׁלֵּם כְּתֻבָּתָהּ. הָיוּ שְׁנַיִם וְהֵן עֵדֵי הַקִּנּוּי וְהַסְּתִירָה וְהַטֻּמְאָה] וְנִמְצְאוּ זוֹמְמִין מְשַׁלְּמִין כְּנֶגֶד הַכְּתֻבָּה וְאֵין לוֹקִין. וְלָמָּה לֹא יֵהָרְגוּ וַהֲרֵי הֵעִידוּ בַּטֻּמְאָה. לְפִי שֶׁלֹּא הִתְרוּ בָּהּ:

When witnesses who testified that a woman was warned by her husband not to enter into privacy with another man or who testified that she disobeyed the warning and entered into privacy with him are disqualified through hazamah, they are punished by lashes. If one witness comes and testifies that she committed adultery after she was warned and entered into privacy, and that witness was disqualified through hazamah, that witness is required to pay the money due her by virtue of her ketubah. If there were two witnesses and they served as the witnesses for the warning, that she entered into privacy, and that she committed adultery, should they be disqualified through hazamah, they are required to pay the money due her by virtue of her ketubah; they do not receive lashes. Why are they not executed - they gave testimony with regard to adultery? Because they did not warn the woman.

שְׁנַיִם שֶׁהֵעִידוּ עַל זֶה שֶׁגָּנַב וְטָבַח אוֹ מָכַר וְהוּזַמּוּ מְשַׁלְּמִין אֶת הַכּל. הֵעִידוּ שְׁנַיִם שֶׁגָּנַב וְהֵעִידוּ שְׁנַיִם אֲחֵרִים שֶׁטָּבַח אוֹ מָכַר וְהוּזַמּוּ אֵלּוּ וְאֵלּוּ. הֲרֵי הָרִאשׁוֹנִים מְשַׁלְּמִין תַּשְׁלוּמֵי כֶּפֶל וְאַחֲרוֹנִים מְשַׁלְּמִין שְׁנַיִם וּשְׁלֹשָׁה. הוּזַמּוּ הָאַחֲרוֹנִים בִּלְבַד הֲרֵי הַגַּנָּב מְשַׁלֵּם תַּשְׁלוּמֵי כֶּפֶל וְהָעֵדִים הָאַחֲרוֹנִים מְשַׁלְּמִין לַגַּנָּב תַּשְׁלוּמֵי אַרְבָּעָה וַחֲמִשָּׁה. נִמְצָא אֶחָד מִן הָאַחֲרוֹנִים זוֹמֵם בָּטְלָה עֵדוּת שְׁנִיָּה. נִמְצָא אֶחָד מִן הָרִאשׁוֹנִים זוֹמֵם בָּטְלָה כָּל הָעֵדוּת שֶׁאִם אֵין גְּנֵבָה אֵין הַטְּבִיחָה אוֹ הַמְּכִירָה מְחַיַּבְתּוֹ לְשַׁלֵּם כְּלוּם:

If the lying witnesses testified that a person stole and slaughtered or sold the stolen animal, should they be disqualified through hazamah, they are required to pay the entire amount. If two witnesses testify that the person stole and two others that he slaughtered or sold the animal, and both pairs of witnesses are disqualified through hazamah, the first witnesses are required to pay twice the animal's worth, and the second pair, two or three times its worth. If the second pair alone were disqualified through hazamah, the thief is required to make a double payment to his victim. The later witnesses must pay the remainder of the four and five time payment. If one of the last witnesses is disqualified through hazamah, the entire last testimony is negated. If one of the first witnesses is disqualified through hazamah, the entire testimony is negated. For if there is no theft, slaughtering it or selling the animal does not obligate the person to pay anything.

שְׁנַיִם שֶׁהֵעִידוּ שֶׁאָכַל שָׂדֶה זוֹ שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים וְנִמְצְאוּ זוֹמְמִין מְשַׁלְּמִין לְבַעַל הַשָּׂדֶה דְּמֵי הַשָּׂדֶה. הֵעִידוּ שְׁנַיִם שֶׁאֲכָלָהּ שָׁנָה רִאשׁוֹנָה וּשְׁנַיִם שֶׁאֲכָלָהּ שָׁנָה שְׁנִיָּה וּשְׁנַיִם שֶׁאֲכָלָהּ שָׁנָה שְׁלִישִׁית וְהוּזַמּוּ כֻּלָּן מְשַׁלְּשִׁין בֵּינֵיהֶן. שֶׁאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁעֵדוּת הַחֲזָקָה שָׁלֹשׁ עֵדֻיּוֹת הֵן הֲרֵי הֵן כְּעֵדוּת אַחַת לַהֲזָמָה. לְפִיכָךְ שְׁלֹשָׁה אַחִים וְאֶחָד מִצְטָרֵף עִם כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד וְהֵעִידוּ בְּשָׁנָה שָׁנָה הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ שָׁלֹשׁ עֵדֻיּוֹת וְתִתְקַיֵּם בָּהֶן הַחֲזָקָה וְהֵן כְּעֵדוּת אַחַת לַהֲזָמָה. שֶׁאִם הוּזַמּוּ כֻּלָּן הֲרֵי שְׁלֹשָׁה הָאַחִין מְשַׁלְּמִין חֲצִי דְּמֵי הַשָּׂדֶה וְזֶה שֶׁנִּצְטָרֵף עִם כָּל אֶחָד מֵהֶן מְשַׁלֵּם חֲצִי דָּמֶיהָ:

When two witnesses testify that a person benefited from the produce of a field for three years and are disqualified through hazamah, they must pay the worth of the field to its owner. If two witnesses testify that a person benefited from the produce of a field for one year, two others testified that he benefited from its produce for a second year, and two others testified that he benefited from its produce for a third year, should they all be disqualified through hazamah, they divide the value of the field among themselves. For although the testimony concerning the establishment of the claimant's right to the field involves three separate testimonies, they are one testimony with regard to disqualification through hazamah. For this reason, when there are three brothers and one other person, that person may join together with all three of the brothers and testify with regard to one of the years. Although they are three testimonies, they are considered as one testimony with regard to disqualification through hazamah. If they are all disqualified through hazamah, the three brothers must together pay half the value of the field and the person who joined together with each of them must pay the other half of its value.

שָׁלֹשׁ כִּתֵּי עֵדִים שֶׁנִּתְקַיֵּם בְּעֵדוּתָן שֶׁשּׁוֹר זֶה מוּעָד וְנִמְצֵאת כַּת רִאשׁוֹנָה וּשְׁנִיָּה זוֹמְמִין כֻּלָּן פְּטוּרִין. נִמְצְאוּ שְׁלָשְׁתָּן זוֹמְמִין כֻּלָּן חַיָּבִין לְשַׁלֵּם הַנֵּזֶק שֶׁאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא תָּם מְשַׁלֵּם חֲצִי נֵזֶק. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים כְּשֶׁהָיוּ כֻּלָּן רוֹמְזִין זֶה אֶת זֶה. אוֹ שֶׁבָּאוּ רְצוּפִין. אוֹ שֶׁהָיוּ מַכִּירִין בַּעַל הַשּׁוֹר וְלֹא הִכִּירוּ הַשּׁוֹר. אֲבָל אִם אֵין שָׁם אַחַת מֵאֵלּוּ הֲרֵי כַּת רִאשׁוֹנָה וּשְׁנִיָּה פְּטוּרִין שֶׁהֲרֵי הֵן אוֹמְרִין לֹא בָּאנוּ אֶלָּא לְחַיְּבוֹ חֲצִי נֵזֶק וְלֹא יָדַעְנוּ שֶׁתָּבוֹא כַּת אַחֶרֶת וְיֵעָשֶׂה מוּעָד:

Different rules apply when an ox is declared to have a tendency to gore on the basis of the testimony of three groups of witnesses. If the first and the second pair of witnesses are disqualified through hazamah, all of the witnesses are released from liability. If all three sets of witnesses are disqualified, they are all obligated to pay for the entire damages even though half-damages are paid for an ordinary ox. When does the above apply? When the witnesses are all motioning to each other, or they appear directly after each other, or they know the identity of the owner of the ox, but do not recognize the ox itself. If none of these factors are present, the first and the second group of witnesses are not liable, for they will say: "We came only to obligate him to pay half-damages. We did not know that subsequently another group would come and cause the ox to be deemed as a goring ox."

וְכֵן שְׁנַיִם שֶׁהֵעִידוּ בְּבֵן סוֹרֵר וּמוֹרֶה עֵדוּת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה וּבָאוּ שְׁנַיִם אַחֲרֵיהֶם וְהֵעִידוּ עָלָיו עֵדוּת הָאַחֲרוֹנָה שֶׁבָּהּ יֵהָרֵג וְהוּזַמּוּ שְׁתֵּיהֶן. כַּת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה לוֹקָה וְאֵינָהּ נֶהֱרֶגֶת מִפְּנֵי שֶׁיְּכוֹלִים לוֹמַר לְהַלְקוֹתוֹ בָּאנוּ. אֲבָל כַּת הָאַחֲרוֹנָה נֶהֱרֶגֶת שֶׁעַל פִּיהֶן בִּלְבַד הוּא נֶהֱרָג. הָיְתָה הַכַּת הָאַחֲרוֹנָה אַרְבָּעָה שְׁנַיִם אוֹמְרִים בְּפָנֵינוּ גָּנַב וּשְׁנַיִם אוֹמְרִים בְּפָנֵינוּ אָכַל וְהוּזַמּוּ כֻּלָּן נֶהֱרָגִין. הֵעִידוּ שְׁנַיִם שֶׁזֶּה גָּנַב נֶפֶשׁ מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל וּמְכָרוֹ וְהוּזַמּוּ הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ נֶחְנָקִין. הֵעִידוּ שְׁנַיִם שֶׁגְּנָבוֹ וְהֵעִידוּ שְׁנַיִם אֲחֵרִים שֶׁמְּכָרוֹ. בֵּין שֶׁהוּזַמּוּ עֵדֵי גְּנֵבָה בֵּין שֶׁהוּזַמּוּ עֵדֵי מְכִירָה כָּל כַּת מֵהֶן שֶׁהוּזַמָּה נֶהֱרֶגֶת. שֶׁהַגְּנֵבָה הִיא תְּחִלַּת חִיּוּבוֹ שֶׁל זֶה לְמִיתָה. הֵעִידוּ שְׁנַיִם שֶׁמְּכָרוֹ לְזֶה הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל וְהוּזַמּוּ וְלֹא הָיוּ שָׁם עֵדִים שֶׁגְּנָבוֹ הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ פְּטוּרִין. שֶׁאֲפִלּוּ לֹא הוּזַמּוּ לֹא הָיָה זֶה נֶהֱרָג מִפְּנֵי שֶׁיָּכוֹל לוֹמַר עַבְדִּי מָכַרְתִּי. בָּאוּ עֵדֵי גְּנֵבָה אַחַר שֶׁהוּזַמּוּ עֵדֵי מְכִירָה אֲפִלּוּ רָאִינוּ אוֹתָן רוֹמְזִין זֶה אֶת זֶה אֵין נֶהֱרָגִין:

The following law applies when two people testified with regard to a "wayward and rebellious son" with regard to the first testimony and two others came afterwards and testified with regard to the second testimony which would cause him to be executed. If they are both disqualified through hazamah, the first group is lashed and not executed. The rationale is that they can say: "We came to have him lashed." The second group, however, is executed, because it is their testimony that causes him to be executed. If the second group consisted of four witnesses: Two said: "In our presence, he stole," and two said: "In our presence, he feasted," should they all be disqualified through hazamah, they are all executed. If two witnesses testify that a person kidnapped a Jewish person and sold him, and they were disqualified through hazamah, they should be executed by strangulation. If two witnesses testified that a person kidnapped a fellow Jew and another two testified that he sold him, whether the witnesses who testified that he kidnapped or those who testified that he sold were disqualified through hazamah, either group which is disqualified through hazamah are executed. The rationale is that kidnapping is the beginning of the conviction and condemnation to death of the defendant. If two witnesses testify that a person sold a fellow Jew and were disqualified through hazamah, but there were no witnesses that he kidnapped him, the witnesses are not liable. The rationale is that even if they were not disqualified through hazamah, the defendant would not have been executed, because he could have excused himself saying: "I sold my servant." If witnesses who testify to the sale come after the disqualification of the witnesses who testified concerning the kidnapping, they are not executed. This applies even if we see that they are motioning to each other.

מוֹצִיא שֵׁם רַע עַל אִשְׁתּוֹ שֶׁהֵבִיא עֵדִים שֶׁזִּנְּתָה כְּשֶׁהִיא אֲרוּסָה וְהֵבִיא אָבִיהָ עֵדִים וֶהֱזִימוּם הֲרֵי עֵדֵי הַבַּעַל נֶהֱרָגִין. חָזַר הַבַּעַל וְהֵבִיא עֵדִים וְהֵזִימוּ עֵדֵי הָאָב. הֲרֵי עֵדֵי הָאָב נֶהֱרָגִין וּמְשַׁלְּמִין מָמוֹן לַבַּעַל. נֶהֱרָגִין מִפְּנֵי שֶׁעֵדֵי הַבַּעַל נִגְמַר דִּינָם לַהֲרִיגָה בְּעֵדוּתָן וּמְשַׁלְּמִין קְנָס מִפְּנֵי שֶׁנִּגְמַר דִּין הַבַּעַל לְשַׁלֵּם קְנָס בְּעֵדוּתָן וְנִמְצְאוּ חַיָּבִין נְפָשׁוֹת לָזֶה וּמָמוֹן לָזֶה. וְכֵן שְׁנַיִם שֶׁהֵעִידוּ עַל זֶה שֶׁבָּא עַל נַעֲרָה הַמְאֹרָסָה וְהוּזְמוּ נֶהֱרָגִין וְאֵין מְשַׁלְּמִין. בָּא עַל בִּתּוֹ שֶׁל פְּלוֹנִי וְהוּזַמּוּ נֶהֱרָגִין וּמְשַׁלְּמִין הַקְּנָס לְאָבִיהָ. פְּלוֹנִי רָבַע הַשּׁוֹר וְהוּזַמּוּ נִסְקָלִין וְאֵין מְשַׁלְּמִין. שׁוֹרוֹ שֶׁל פְּלוֹנִי נִסְקָלִין וּמְשַׁלְּמִין דְּמֵי הַשּׁוֹר לְבַעַל הַשּׁוֹר. וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּזֶה:

The following laws apply if a person spreads a libelous report about his wife, bringing witnesses that she committed adultery after she had been consecrated. If her father brought witnesses who disqualified the witnesses brought by the husband through hazamah, those witnesses are executed. If the husband brought witnesses who disqualified the witnesses brought by the father through hazamah, those witnesses are executed and are required to make financial restitution to the husband. They are executed, because the witnesses brought by the husband were condemned to death on the basis of their testimony. They must pay a fine, because the husband was held liable to pay a fine because of their testimony. Thus they are obligated to be executed because of this person and obligated financially, because of another person. Similarly, when two people testify that a person engaged in relations with a consecrated maiden and they are disqualified through hazamah, they are executed and are not required to make a financial payment. If they said: "He engaged in relations with the daughter of so-and-so," and they are disqualified through hazamah, they are executed and are required to pay the fine to her father. If witnesses testify: "So-and-so sodomized an ox," and they were disqualified by hazamah, they are executed, but not held liable financially. If they said: "the ox belonging to so-and-so," they are executed and required to pay the value of the ox to its owner. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.