סנהדרין ה׳Sanhedrin 5

Mishnah

משנה: הָיוּ בוֹדְקִין אוֹתָן בְּשֶׁבַע חֲקִירוֹת בְּאֵי זוֹ שָׁבוּעַ בְּאֵי זוֹ שָׁנָה בְּאֵי זֶה חֹדֶשׁ בְּכַמָּה בַחֹדֶשׁ בְּאֵי זֶה יוֹם בְּאֵי זוֹ שָׁעָה בְּאֵי זֶה מָקוֹם. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר בְּאֵי זֶה יוֹם בְּאֵי זוֹ שָׁעָה בְּאֵי זֶה מָקוֹם מַכִּירִין אַתֶּם אוֹתוֹ וְהִתְרֵיתֶם בּוֹ. הָעוֹבֵד עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה אֶת מֶה עָבַד וּבַמֶּה עָבַד:

MISHNAH: They were investigating him in seven ways: In which Sabbatical period, in which year, in which month, which day of the month, which day, which hour, at which place? Rebbi Yose said, which day, which hour, which place, do you recognize him, and did you warn him? If one worshipped idols, what did he worship and how did he worship?

Halakhah

הלכה: הָיוּ בוֹדְקִין אוֹתָן בְּשֶׁבַע חֲקִירוֹת כול׳. וְלֹא תַנִּינָן. בְּאֵי זֶה יוֹבֵל. שֶׁאֵין הַדָּבָר מָצוּי. אַשְׁכַּח תַּנֵּי. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוּחַי אוֹמֵר. אַף בְּאֵי זֶה יוֹבֵל. וְקַיְימוּנָהּ בָּהוּא דְעָאַל וּבָהוּא דִנְפַק.

HALAKHAH: “They were investigating him in seven ways,” etc. But we did not state, in which Jubilee period? For that is not current. It was found stated: Rebbi Simeon ben Ioḥai says, also in which Jubilee period? We confirmed that in a year which started or concluded [a Jubilee period].

מְנַיִין לְשֶׁבַע חֲקִירוֹת. תַּנָּא שְׁמוּאֵל הַזָּקֵן קוּמֵי רִבִּי אָחָא. וְדָרַשְׁתָּ וְחָקַרְתָּ וְשָׁאַלְתָּ הֵיטֵב וְהִנֵּה אֱמֶת נָכוֹן. אָמַר לֵיהּ. לָא תְהֵא קְרָא וַאֲזִיל אֶלָּא וְדָרַשְׁתָּ וְחָקַרְתָּ וְשָׁאַלְתָּ הֵיטֵב וְהוּגַּד לְךָ וְשָׁמָעְתָּ וְשָׁאַלְתָּ הֵיטֵב. הֵיטֵב הֵיטֵב לִגְזֵירָה שָׁוָה. לִיתֵּן [לְ]כָל אַחַת וְאַחַת שְׁמוּעָה שְׁאֵלָה דְּרִישָׁה וַחֲקִירָה. רִבִּי יִצְחָק מַקְשֵׁי לָהּ. הֲווֹן תְּפִיסִין בְּחַד לֵיסְטֵיס דְּטִיבֵּרִיָּא אָמְרִין. כְּדוֹן קְטוֹל כְּדוֹן קְטַל. וּמְנַיִין לָזֶה שֶׁבַע חֲקִירוֹת. אִיסִּי אָמַר. כָּל זְמַן שֶׁאִילּוּ הָעֵדִים יְכוֹלִין לְהִזְדַּמֵּם עַל אוֹתָהּ עֵדוּת אֵין הַהוֹרֵג נֶהֱרָג.

From where the seven investigations? Samuel the Elder stated before Rebbi Aḥa: You shall inquire, investigate, ask in depth, and behold, the matter is well founded. He told him, this verse does not work; but: you shall inquire, investigate, ask in depth; it will be told to you, you shall listen, ask in depth. In depth, in depth for an equal cut, to require in each case listening, asking, inquiry, and investigation. Rebbi Isaac asked about this: If they caught an armed robber in Tiberias and said, this is the murderer, this is the murdered; why does this need seven investigations? Issi said, any time that the witnesses could not be proven perjured, the murderer cannot be executed on that testimony.

מַכִּירִין אַתֶּם אוֹתוֹ. מֶה הָיָה. גּוֹי הָיָה אוֹ יִשְׂרָאֵל הָיָה. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מֵהָדָא דָּמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. נֶהֱרַג מִטִּיבֵּרִיָּא לְצִיפּוֹרִי חֲזָקָה שֶׁיִּשְׂרָאֵל הָיָה.

“Do you recognize him?” Who was he, a Gentile or an Israel? Let us hear from what Rebbi Joḥanan said: If he was slain between Tiberias and Sepphoris, it is prima facie evidence that he was an Israel.

הִתְרֵיתֶם בּוֹ. מְנַיִין לְהַתְרָיָיה. רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹנָתָן. וְאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר יִקַּח אֶת אֲחוֹתוֹ. חֶסֶד הוּא. אָמַר רִבִּי בּוּן. קַיִן נָשָׂא אֲחוֹתוֹ. הֶבֶל נָשָׂא אֲחוֹתוֹ. חֶסֶד עָשִׂיתִי עִם הָרִאשׁוֹנִים שֶׁיִיבָּנֶה עוֹלָם מֵהֶן. כִּי אָמַרְתִּי עוֹלָם חֶסֶד יִבָּנֶה.

“Did you warn him?” From where warning? Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman in the name of Rebbi Jonathan: A man who would take his sister …, it is ḥesed. Rebbi Bun said, Cain married his sister, Abel married his sister. It is charitable, I was charitable with the first generations so the world could be inhabited; I said, the world was to be built on ḥesed.

תַּנֵּי. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי אוֹמֵר. עַל פִּי שְׁנַיִם עֵדִים יוּמַת הַמֵּת. [וְכִי] הַמֵּת מֵת. אֶלָּא לְהוֹדִיעוֹ בְּאֵי זוֹ מִיתָה מֵת. תַּנֵּי. רִבִּי יוּדָה בֵירִבִּי אִלְעַאי אוֹמֵר. וְכִי יָזִיד אִישׁ עַל רֵעֵהוּ לְהוֹרְגוֹ בְעָרְמָה. שֶׁיַּעֲרִימוּהוּ בְּאֵי זוֹ מִיתָה מֵת.

It was stated: Rebbi Simeon ben Ioḥai said, by the mouth of two witnesses shall the dead die. Does he die when dead? But to tell him by which kind of death he will be executed. It was stated: Rebbi Jehudah ben Rebbi Illai said, and if a man intentionally kill his neighbor knowingly; they shall inform him by which kind of death he will be executed.

הָיְתָה מִיתָתוֹ בַחֲמוּרָה וְהִתְרוּ בוֹ בַּקַּלָּה. יְכִיל מֵימַר. אִילּוּ הֲוָה יְדַע שֶׁמִּיתָתוֹ בַחֲמוּרָה לָא הֲוָה עֲבַד הָדָא מִילְּתָא. הָיָה מִיתָתוֹ בַקַּלָּה וְהִתְרוּהוּ בַּחֲמוּרָה. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוּדָן בֵירִבִּי אִילְעַאי שֶׁיַּעֲרִימוּהוּ בְּאֵי זוֹ מִיתָה מֵת.

If his death should have been a severe one but they warned him about an easy one. He could say that had he known that his death was to be severe, he would not have committed that crime. If his death should have been an easy one but they warned him about a severe one; in the opinion of Rebbi Jehudah ben Rebbi Illai they have to inform him by which kind of death he will be executed.

הָיוּ מַתְרִין בּוֹ וְשׁוֹתֵק. מַתְרִין בּוֹ וּמַרְכִין בְּרֹאשׁוֹ. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאוֹמֵר יוֹדֵעַ אֲנִי. פָּטוּר. עַד שֶׁיֹּאמַר. עַל מְנָת כֵּן אֲנִי עוֹשֶׂה. רָאוּהוּ שׁוֹפֵךְ דָּם. אָ‍מְרוּ לוֹ. הֲוֵי יוֹדֵעַ שֶׁבֶּן בְּרִית הוּא וְהַתּוֹרָה אָמְרָה שׁוֹפֵךְ דַּם הָאָדָם בָּאָדָם דָּמוֹ יִשָּׁפֵךְ. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאָמַר. יוֹדֵעַ אֲנִי. פָּטוּר עַד שֶׁיֹּאמַר. עַל מְנָת כֵּן אֲנִי עוֹשֶׂה. רָאוּהוּ מְחַלֵּל שַׁבָּת. אָמְרוּ לוֹ. הֲוֵי יוֹדֵעַ שֶׁהוּא שַׁבָּת וְהַתּוֹרָה אָמְרָה מְחַלְלֶיהָ מוֹת יוּמָת. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאָמַר. יוֹדֵעַ אֲנִי. פָּטוּר. עַד שֶׁיֹּאמַר. עַל מְנָת כֵּן אֲנִי עוֹשֶׂה.

“If they warned him and he remained silent, they warned him and he nodded his head, even if he said, I know, he cannot be prosecuted unless he say: for that purpose I am doing it.” “If they saw him spilling blood; they told him, know that he is a son of the Covenant and the Torah said, he who spills a man’s blood, by man his blood shall be spilled, even if he said, I know, he cannot be prosecuted unless he say: for that purpose I am doing it.” “If they saw him desecrating the Sabbath; they told him, know that today is Sabbath and the Torah said, its desecrators shall be put to death, even if he said, I know, he cannot be prosecuted unless he say: for that purpose I am doing it.”

רִבִּי חִיָיה בַּר גַּמְדָּא שָׁאַל. מְקוֹשֵׁשׁ מִשּׁוּם מַאי מִיחַיֵיב. מִשּׁוּם תּוֹלֵשׁ אוֹ מִשּׁוּם קוֹצֵר. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מֵהָדָא. וַיִּהְיוּ בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בַּמִּדְבָּר וַיִּמְצְאוּ. מְלַמֵּד שֶּׁמְצָאוּהוּ תוֹלֵשׁ עֵצִים מִן הַקַּרְקַע.

Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Gamda asked: What was the gatherer’s guilt? Because of tearing off or because of reaping? Let us hear from the following: The Children of Israel were in the desert when they found … This teaches that he was tearing wood off the ground.

רִבִּי חִיָיה בַּר גַּמְדָּא שָׁאַל. מְקוֹשֵׁשׁ בַּמֶּה הִיא מִיתָתוֹ. בִּסְקִילָה. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מֵהָדָא. יוֹדְעִין הָיוּ שֶׁמְקוֹשֵׁשׁ חַיָיב מִיתָה וְלֹא הָיוּ יוֹדְעִין בַּמֶּה הָיְתָה מִיתָתוֹ. אַשְׁכַּח תַּנֵי רִבִּי חִיָיה. הוֹצֵא אֶת הַמְקַלֵּל מִחוּץ לַמַּחֲנֶה. בַּמֶּה הָיְתָה מִיתָתוֹ. בִּסְקִילָה.

Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Gamda asked: How was the gatherer put to death? By stoning. Let us hear from the following: “They knew that the gatherer should be executed but they did not know how he should be put to death.” It was found that Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: Take the blasphemer outside the camp. How was he put to death? By stoning.

אֶת מֶה עָבַד. לִפְעוֹר אוֹ לְמֶרְקוּלִיס. בַּמֶּה עָבְדָהּ. בַּעֲבוֹדָתָהּ עָבְדָהּ אוֹ בַעֲבוֹדַת גָּבוֹהַּ. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מֵהָדָא. מַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁבָּאוּ שְׁנַיִם וְאָמְרוּ. רָאִינוּ זֶה עוֹבֵד עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה וְאֵין אָנוּ יוֹדְעִין פְּעוֹר הָיָה אוֹ מֶרְקוּלִיס הָיָה. דָּנִין אוֹתוֹ בִשְׁתֵּיהֶן וּבְאֵי זוֹ מִזְדַּכֶּה פוֹטְרִין אוֹתוֹ.

“What did he worship?” Peor or Mercury? “And how did he worship?” In its proper worship or the worship of Heaven? Let us hear from the following: It happened that two [witnesses] came and said, we saw that this one was worshipping idols, but we do not know whether it was Peor or Mercury. One judges him for both and for the one in which he was found innocent one lets him go.

Mishnah

משנה: כָּל הַמַּרְבֶּה בִבְדִּיקוֹת הֲרֵי זֶה מְשׁוּבָּח. מַעֲשֶׂה וּבָדַק בֶּן זַכַּאי בְּעוּקְצֵי תְאֵנִים. וּמַה בֵּין חֲקִירוֹת לִבְדִיקוֹת. אֶלָּא שֶׁבַּחֲקִירוֹת אֶחָד אוֹמֵר אֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ עֵדוּתָן בְּטֵילָה. בְּדִיקוֹת אָמַר אֶחָד אֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ וַאֲפִלּוּ שְׁנַיִם אוֹמְרִים אֵין אָנוּ יוֹדְעִין עֵדוּתָן קַיֶימֶת. אֶחָד חֲקִירוֹת וְאֶחָד בְּדִיקוֹת בִּזְמַן שֶׁהֵן מַכְחִישִׁין זֶה אֶת זֶה עֵדוּתָן בְּטֵילָה:

MISHNAH: Anybody who adds inquiries is praiseworthy. It happened that Ben Zakkai cross-examined about fig stalks. What is the difference between investigations and cross-examinations? In investigations, if one said “I do not know”, their testimony is worthless. In cross-examinations, if one said “I do not know”, or even two say “we do not know,” their testimony remains valid. Both in investigations and cross-examinations, if they contradict one another their testimony is worthless.

Halakhah

הלכה: כָּל הַמַּרְבֶּה בִבְדִּיקוֹת כול׳. בַּמֶּה לִקְטָן. בְּעוּקְצֵיהֶן לִקְטָן. בַּמֶּה אֲכָלָן. בְּגַלְעִינֵיהֶן.

HALAKHAH: “Anybody who adds inquiries,” etc. How did he pluck them? He plucked them with their stalks. How did he eat them? With their pits.

תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן. מִי שֶׁהָיוּ שְׁתֵּי כִיתֵּי עֵדִים מְעִידִין. אֵילּוּ מְעִידִין שֶׁנָּזַר שְׁתַּיִם וְאֵילּוּ מְעִידִין שֶׁנָּזַר חָמֵשׁ. בֵּית שַׁמַּי אוֹמְרִים. נֶחְלְקָה עֵדוּתָן. אֵין כָּאן נְזִירוּת. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים. יֵשׁ בִּכְלָל חָמֵשׁ שְׁתַּיִם. וִיהֵא נָזִיר שְׁתַּיִם. רַב אָמַר. בִּכְלָל נֶחְלְקוּ. אֲבָל בִּפְרָט כָּל עַמָּא מוֹדוּ נֶחְלְקָה הָעֵדוּתָ. וְרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר. בְּמוֹנֶה נֶחְלְקוּ. אֲבָל בְּכוֹלֵל כָּל עַמָּא מוֹדוּ שֶׁיֵּשׁ בִּכְלָל חָמֵשׁ שְׁתַּיִם. הֵידֵינוֹ כוֹלֵל וְהֵידֵינוֹ מוֹנֶה. כּוֹלֵל. אָהֵן אוֹמֵר תַּרְתֵּי וְאָהֵן אָמַר חָמֵשׁ. מוֹנֶה. אָהֵן אָמַר חָדָא תַרְתֵּי. וְאָהֵן אָמַר תְּלַת אַרְבָּעֵי.

There, we have stated: “If two groups of witnesses were testifying against a person, one group say that he vowed nazir twice, the others say that he vowed nazir five times. The House of Shammai say, the testimony is split and there is no nezirut there. But the House of Hillel say, five contains two; he should be a nazir twice.” Rav said, they differ in the overall testimony. But in detail, everybody agrees that the testimony is split. Rebbi Joḥanan said, they differ in counting. But in an overall testimony, everybody agrees that five contains two. What is overall and what is counting? Overall, this one says two, the other one says five. Counting, this one says one, two, the other one says three, four.

רַב אָמַר. הִכְחִישׁ עֵדוּת בְּתוֹךְ עֵדוּת לֹא בָטְלָה הָעֵדוּת. וְרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר. הִכְחִישׁ עֵדוּת בְּתוֹךְ עֵדוּת בָּטְלָה הָעֵדוּת. דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל הִכְחִישׁ עֵדוּת לְאַחַר עֵדוּת לֹא בָטְלָה הָעֵדוּת. חֵיילֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן מֵהָדָא. דָּמַר רִבִּי בָּא בַּר חִיָיה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. הוּחְזַק הַמּוֹנֶה. זֶה אוֹמֵר. מִן הַכִּיס מָנָה. וְזֶה אוֹמֵר. מִן הַצְּרוֹר מָנָה. הִכְחִישׁ עֵדוּת בְּתוֹךְ עֵדוּת אוֹף רַב מוֹדֶה שֶׁבָּטְלָה הָעֵדוּת. מַה פְלִיגִין. בְּשֶׁהָיוּ שְׁתֵּי כִיתֵּי עֵדִים. אַחַת אוֹמֶרֶת. מִן הַכִּיס מָנָה. וְאַחַת אוֹמֶרֶת. מִצְּרוֹר מָנָה. הִכְחִישׁ עֵדוּת בְּתוֹךְ עֵדוּת בָּטְלָה עֵדוּת. וּכְרַב לֹא בָטְלָה עֵדוּת. אַחַת אוֹמֶרֶת. לְתוֹךְ חֵיקוֹ מָנָה. וְאַחַת אוֹמֶרֶת. לְתוֹךְ פּוּנְדָּתוֹ מָנָה. דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל הִכְחִישׁ עֵדוּת בְּתוֹךְ עֵדוּת לֹא בָטְלָה הָעֵדוּת. אֶחָד אוֹמֵר. בַּסַּיִיף הֲרָגוֹ. וְאֶחָד אוֹמֵר. בַּמַּקֵּל הֲרָגוֹ. הַכְחֵשׁ עֵדוּת בְּתוֹךְ עֵדוּת אוֹף רַב מוֹדֶה שֶׁבָּטְלָה הָעֵדוּת. מַה פְלִיגִין. בְּשֶׁהָיוּ שְׁתֵּי כִיתֵּי עֵדִים. אַחַת אוֹמֶרֶת. בַּסַּיִיף. וְאַחַת אוֹמֶרֶת. בַּמַּקֵּל. הַכְחֵשׁ עֵדוּת בְּתוֹךְ עֵדוּת בָּטְלָה עֵדוּת. וּכְרַב לֹא בָטְלָה עֵדוּת. אַחַת אוֹמֶרֶת. לַצָּפוֹן נָטָה. וְאַחַת אוֹמֶרֶת. לַדָּרוֹם פָּנָה. דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל הִכְחִישׁ עֵדוּת לְאַחַר עֵדוּת לֹא בָטְלָה הָעֵדוּת. חֵיְילֵיהּ דְּרַב מֵהָדָא דְתַנִּינָן תַּמָּן. רִבִּי יוּדָן וְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמְרִין. הוֹאִיל וְזוֹ וָזוֹ מוֹדוֹת שֶׁאֵינוֹ קַיָים יִנָּשֵׂאוּ. וְלֹא שְׁמִיעַ דָּמַר רִבִּי לָעְזָר. מוֹדֶה רִבִּי יְהוּדָה וְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בְּעֵדִים. מַה בֵין עֵדִים וּמַה בֵין צָרָה. לֹא עָשׂוּ דִּבְרֵי צָרָה בַחֲבֵירָתָהּ כְּלוּם. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. אִין אָמְרָהּ רִבִּי לָעְזָר מִינִּי שְׁמָעָהּ וַאֲמָרָהּ. מַתְנִיתָא פְלִיגָא עַל רַב. אֶחָד חֲקִירוֹת וְאֶחָד בְּדִיקוֹת בִּזְמַן שֶׁמַּכְחִישִׁין זֶה לָזֶה עֵדוּתָן בְּטֵילָה. מָה עֲבַד לָהּ רַב. אָמַר רִבִּי מָנָא. פָּתַר לָהּ רָב עֵד בְּעֵד. אָמַר רִבִּי אָבִין. אֲפִילוּ יִפְתָּר כַּת בְּכַת שַׁנְיָיא הִיא לְדִינֵי נְפָשׁוֹת. דִּכְתִיב צֶדֶק צֶדֶק תִּרְדּוֹף.

Rav said, if testimony was contradictory in its essence, the testimony is not void. Rebbi Joḥanan said, if testimony is contradictory in itself, the testimony is void. In the opinion of everybody, if testimony was contradictory in aspects that belong after the fact, the testimony is not void. The strength of Rebbi Joḥanan is consistent with what Rebbi Abba bar Ḥiyya said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, if it was agreed that he counted but one [witness] said, he counted from a wallet, and the other said, he counted from a bundle, that contradicts the essence of the testimony, and Rav will agree that the testimony be void. Where do they disagree? If there were two groups of witnesses, one says he counted from a wallet and the other says he counted from a bundle. That contradicts the essence of the testimony: the testimony is void, but according to Rav, the testimony is not void. One said, he counted into his bosom, but the other said, he counted into his money-belt: everybody agrees that this contradicts the essence of the testimony but the testimony is not void. If one [witness] said, he killed him with a sword, the other [witness] said, he killed him with a mace, that contradicts the essence of the testimony; Rav will agree that the testimony be void. Where do they disagree? If there were two groups of witnesses, one says he killed him with a sword and the other says, he killed him with a mace. That contradicts the essence of the testimony, the testimony is void, but according to Rav, the testimony is not void. One says, he turned to the North and one says, he ran away to the South, everybody agrees that the testimony was contradictory in aspects that belong after the fact, and the testimony is not void. The strength of Rav comes from what we have stated there: “Rebbi Jehudah and Rebbi Simeon say, since both agree that he is not alive they can be remarried.” He did not hear that Rebbi Eleazar said, Rebbi Jehudah and Rebbi Simeon concede in the case of witnesses. What is the difference between witnesses and the co-wife? They do not consider the co-wife’s words compared to those of her companion. Rebbi Joḥanan said, if Rebbi Eleazar said this, he said it because he had heard it from me. The Mishnah disagrees with Rav: “Both in investigations and cross-examinations, if they contradict one another their testimony is worthless.” What does Rav do with this? Rebbi Mana said, Rav will explain it as referring to single witness against single witness. Rebbi Abun said, even if you say groups and groups. There is a difference in criminal cases, as it is written: Justice, justice you shall pursue.