Mishnayos Shevuos Perek 4 Mishnah 4
Change text layout:
שבועות פרק ד׳ משנה ד׳
If both of the witnesses denied knowledge of the incident together, both of them are liable. If they denied knowledge one after the other, the first who denied knowledge is liable, and the second is exempt, as once the first witness denies knowledge of the incident, the second is an individual witness, whose testimony is not decisive. If one of the two witnesses denied knowledge of the incident, and the other one admitted that he had knowledge and proceeded to testify, the one who denies knowledge of the incident is liable. If there were two sets of witnesses that took the oath of testimony, and the first set denied knowledge of the matter and then the second set denied knowledge of the matter, both of the sets are liable, because the testimony can exist with either of them, as even after the first set denies knowledge of the incident, the second remains capable of providing decisive testimony.
כָּפְרוּ שְׁנֵיהֶן כְּאַחַת, שְׁנֵיהֶן חַיָּבִין. בָּזֶה אַחַר זֶה, הָרִאשׁוֹן חַיָּב וְהַשֵּׁנִי פָטוּר. כָּפַר אֶחָד וְהוֹדָה אֶחָד, הַכּוֹפֵר חַיָּב. הָיוּ שְׁתֵּי כִתֵּי עֵדִים, כָּפְרָה הָרִאשׁוֹנָה וְאַחַר כָּךְ כָּפְרָה הַשְּׁנִיָּה, שְׁתֵּיהֶם חַיָּבוֹת, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהָעֵדוּת יְכוֹלָה לְהִתְקַיֵּם בִּשְׁתֵּיהֶן:
Bartenura
כפרו שניהם כאחד. בתוך כדי דיבור:
בזה אחר זה. שהיה בין זה לזה יותר מכדי דיבור:
הראשון חייב. אבל השני פטור, שכיון שכפר הראשון שוב אין השני ראוי להעיד, שהוא יחידי:
שתיהן חייבות. בגמרא פריך, ראשונה אמאי חייבת הא קיימא כת שניה, ומה הפסידוהו הראשונים בכפירתם. ומשני, דמתניתין איירי כגון שהיו העדים של כת שניה קרובים בנשותיהן, שלא היו כשרים להעיד כשכפרה כת ראשונה, ונשותיהן גוססות. מהו דתימא כיון דקיי״ל רוב גוססים למיתה הוו להו כאילו מתו ותפטר כת ראשונה דהא קיימא שניה, קמ״ל השתא מיהא לא שכוב ונמצא שלא היה שם בשעת כפירה אלא כת ראשונה בלבד, ולפיכך חייבין:
כפרו שניהם כאחת – in an interval equivalent to the time of speaking (“Greetings to you, My teacher.”).
בזה אחר זה – that there was between [the testimony of] this one and [the testimony of] that one more than an interval equivalent to the time of speaking.
הראשון חייב – but the second is exempt, for since the first one denied, the second one is furthermore not appropriate to testify because he is an individual (and testimony requires two or more individuals).
שתיהן חייבות – in the Gemara (Tractate Shevuot 32b-33a) raises the objection – why is the first [set of witnesses] liable, for the second set [of witnesses] exists? For what have the first [set of witnesses] lost through their denial? And it answers that that the our Mishnah is speaking about q case where the witnesses of the second group were related through their wives (see Rashi’s comment: they married two sisters and are not valid as a singular testimony, and they were not valid to testify when the first set [of witnesses] denied [that they knew anything to testify] and their wives were on their deathbeds, for you might have thought that we hold that most people on their deathbeds will die, it was for them as if they [i.e., their wives) had died and the first set [of witnesses] were exempt but the second set exists. It comes to tell us now however that he is not dead. But it is found that only the first set [of witnesses] alone was there at the time of the denial, and therefore, they are liable.