Wenn sie [Zeugen] zu einem Individuum sagten: Du hast verbotenes Fett gegessen, haftet er für einen Chattat [ein Opfer, das gebracht wird, um die Sünde zu sühnen]. Wenn ein Zeuge sagt, er habe gegessen, und ein anderer Zeuge sagt, er habe nicht gegessen; oder wenn eine Frau sagt, dass er gegessen hat und [eine andere] Frau sagt, dass er nicht gegessen hat, haftet er für einen Asham Talui [ein Schuldopfer , das auf eine mögliche Begehung einer Sünde gebracht wurde]. Wenn ein Zeuge sagt, er habe gegessen, und er [selbst] sagt: "Ich habe nicht gegessen", ist er befreit. [Wenn] zwei [Zeugen] sagen, er habe gegessen, und er [selbst] sagt: "Ich habe nicht gegessen", hält Rabbi Meir ihn für haftbar. Rabbi Meir sagte: Da zwei [Zeugen in der Lage sind], die schwere [Strafe] des Todes auf ihn zu bringen, können sie nicht die weniger schwere [Strafe] eines Opfers auf ihn bringen? Sie [die Weisen] sagten zu ihm: Konnte er nicht argumentieren: "Ich habe es absichtlich getan"?
Bartenura on Mishnah Keritot
אמרו לו – even if one [witness] says to hm, “you ate forbidden fat,” and he is silent and doesn’t contradict him.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Keritot
Introduction
Our mishnah talks about various types of cases where a person might or might not have eaten forbidden fat, a transgression that would cause him to bring a hatat for atonement.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Keritot
מביא חטאת – by his word.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Keritot
If they said to him: you ate forbidden fat, he is liable to a hatat; This is the obvious case. If a person ate a piece of fat and doesn’t know whether it was helev (forbidden fat) or shuman (permitted fat), then he must bring a hatat.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Keritot
שנים אומרים לו אכלת חלב – and even one-hundred [witnesses], but he contradicts them and says: “I am sure that I did not eat [prohibited fat],” he does not bring a sacrifice through their word, as it is written (Leviticus 4:28): “Or the sin of which he is guilty is brought to his knowledge,” and not that others would inform him.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Keritot
If one witness says: he ate, and another says: he did not eat, or if one woman says, he ate, and another says, he did not eat, he is liable to an asham talui. In this case, there is contradictory testimony with regard to whether the fat he ate was forbidden. Furthermore, there is either only one witness who testifies that he ate forbidden fat, or that witness is a woman, whose testimony does not fully count. Since there is no proper testimony, he does not bring a hatat. However, he does bring an asham talui, a “suspended asham.” As I explained in the introduction to Keritot, this is a sacrifice brought when it is not clear if a person transgressed.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Keritot
רבי מאיר מחייב – but the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Meir.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Keritot
If one witness says: he ate, and another says: he did not eat, or if one woman says, he ate, and another says, he did not eat, he is liable to an asham talui. In this case, there is no solid testimony that he ate forbidden fat, and he himself denies having done so. These two factors combine to exempt him from having to bring a sacrifice.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Keritot
אם הביאוהו שנים כו' – as, for example, if they testified against him that he killed a person.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Keritot
If one witness says, he ate, and he himself says, I did not eat, he is exempt. In this case, there is proper testimony against him, but he himself denies having eaten forbidden fat. Rabbi Meir argues that just as in a case of the death penalty, where two witnesses can make him liable, so too here, when it comes to bringing a sacrifice to atone for a sin, two people can make him liable, even if he denies having transgressed. The other rabbis argue against Rabbi Meir by noting that there is a difference between testimony for a capital crime, such as murder, and testimony with regard to liability for a sacrifice. In the case of the sacrifice, if the person admits to having eaten the forbidden fat, but claims to have done so intentionally, he is not obligated for a sacrifice, because sacrifices are brought only for accidental sins. Therefore, when he says, “I didn’t eat” he is believed.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Keritot
ם ירצה לומה מזיד הייתי – if he would want to exempt himself through a lie, he would be able to say, “I acted willfully” for a person who acts willfully is exempt from a sacrifice.
