Mishnah
Mishnah

Commentary for Makkot 1:1

כֵּיצַד הָעֵדִים נַעֲשִׂים זוֹמְמִין, מְעִידִין אָנוּ בְאִישׁ פְּלוֹנִי שֶׁהוּא בֶן גְּרוּשָׁה אוֹ בֶן חֲלוּצָה, אֵין אוֹמְרִים יֵעָשֶׂה זֶה בֶן גְּרוּשָׁה אוֹ בֶן חֲלוּצָה תַחְתָּיו, אֶלָּא לוֹקֶה אַרְבָּעִים. מְעִידִין אָנוּ בְאִישׁ פְּלוֹנִי שֶׁהוּא חַיָּב לִגְלוֹת, אֵין אוֹמְרִים יִגְלֶה זֶה תַחְתָּיו, אֶלָּא לוֹקֶה אַרְבָּעִים. מְעִידִין אָנוּ בְאִישׁ פְּלוֹנִי שֶׁגֵּרַשׁ אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ וְלֹא נָתַן לָהּ כְּתֻבָּתָהּ, וַהֲלֹא בֵּין הַיּוֹם וּבֵין לְמָחָר סוֹפוֹ לִתֵּן לָהּ כְּתֻבָּתָהּ, אוֹמְדִין כַּמָּה אָדָם רוֹצֶה לִתֵּן בִּכְתֻבָּתָהּ שֶׁל זוֹ, שֶׁאִם נִתְאַלְמְנָה אוֹ נִתְגָּרְשָׁה, וְאִם מֵתָה יִירָשֶׁנָּה בַעְלָהּ. מְעִידִין אָנוּ בְאִישׁ פְּלוֹנִי שֶׁהוּא חַיָּב לַחֲבֵרוֹ אֶלֶף זוּז עַל מְנָת לִתְּנָן לוֹ מִכָּאן וְעַד שְׁלשִׁים יוֹם, וְהוּא אוֹמֵר מִכָּאן וְעַד עֶשֶׂר שָׁנִים, אוֹמְדִין כַּמָּה אָדָם רוֹצֶה לִתֵּן וְיִהְיוּ בְיָדוֹ אֶלֶף זוּז, בֵּין נוֹתְנָן מִכָּאן וְעַד שְׁלשִׁים יוֹם, בֵּין נוֹתְנָן מִכָּאן וְעַד עֶשֶׂר שָׁנִים:

How are the witnesses made zomemin? [This is the intent: Those witnesses who are found to be zomemin ("scheming"), and in whom the law of hazamah is not implemented, i.e., in whom (Deuteronomy 19:19): "Then you shall do to him as he schemed to do to his brother" cannot be satisfied, how do they become zomemin?] (If they say:) We testify about this man [a Cohein] that he is the son of a divorcée [i.e., his mother was divorced before us before he was born, and he is a challal (unfit for the priesthood)], or the son of a chalutzah, we do not say [if they were proved zomemin, and they were Cohanim], let this one be considered the son of a divorcée or the son of a chalutzah instead of him, [for it is written: "Then you shall do to him as he schemed" — to him, and not to his seed. And if you render him a challal and he is a Cohein, you have rendered his seed unfit (for the priesthood) forever. And if you say let us render him alone unfit and not his seed — we require "as he schemed to do," and this does not obtain, for he schemed to render both the adjudged and his seed unfit], but he receives forty stripes, [it being written (Ibid. 28:1): "…and they vindicate the righteous one and incriminate the wicked one, if liable to stripes be the wicked one, etc.": Now, is it because they vindicate the righteous one and incriminate the wicked one that the wicked one is liable to stripes! It is, rather, (intimated) that if witnesses incriminate one who is (really) righteous, and other witnesses come and vindicate the one who was righteous all along, rendering the (first) witnesses wicked (i.e., zomemin), then: "if liable to stripes be the wicked one" (in the event that what they intended for the righteous one cannot be done to them)]. (If they say:) We testify about this man that he is liable to exile, we do not say let them be exiled in his stead, but he receives forty stripes, [it being written (Ibid. 19:5): "…he shall flee" — he, and not his zomemin.] (If they say:) We testify about this man that he divorced his wife [before us on this and this day] and did not give her her kethubah, [and the other says: I did not divorce her and I do not owe her a kethubah] — now, either today or tomorrow, will he not give her a kethubah? [i.e., What shall they pay him? If you say the entire kethubah, might he not die or divorce her today or tomorrow, in which instance she will receive it anyway, so that they would have caused him no loss whatsoever!] (Rather) We estimate how much one would want to give for the kethubah of this woman [on the possibility that] if she is widowed or divorced, [he will receive the kethubah] and if she dies, her husband will inherit her [and he will lose the money that he gave. And it is this amount that the witnesses give to the husband.] (If they say:) We testify about this man that he owes his neighbor a thousand zuz, which he must pay within thirty days; and he says: within ten years, we estimate how much one would give to have a thousand zuz in his hand for ten years rather than for thirty days.

Bartenura on Mishnah Makkot

When do witnesses become zomemin. This is what it means to say, those witnesses that were found zomemin and we don't do to them the law of hazama, meaning that we don't fulfill in them "And do to them as they planned to do to their brother", how are they made zomemin.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

English Explanation of Mishnah Makkot

Introduction The first six mishnayoth of Makkoth deal with perjuring witnesses, who according to Deuteronomy 20:18-19 are to receive the same punishment that they tried to impose upon the accused. For instance if they testified that a person was guilty of murder and therefore should be executed and then were found to have perjured themselves, they are themselves to be executed. The first mishnah points out cases where this punishment upon the witnesses cannot be carried out, at least not in a simple fashion.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Bartenura on Mishnah Makkot

We testify about this man so-and-so. Kohen.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

English Explanation of Mishnah Makkot

Although this mishnah begins with the question, how do witnesses become perjurers, we will not learn the mishnaic definition of perjury until mishnah four. This mishnah will instead discuss the punishment of perjuring witnesses who do not, for various, reasons, simply receive the punishment they tried to impose upon the accused.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Bartenura on Mishnah Makkot

That he is the son of a divorced woman. In front of us his mother was divorced before she gave birth and behold he is unfit for the Temple service.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

English Explanation of Mishnah Makkot

How do witnesses become liable [to punishment] as perjurers?
[If they say:] “We testify that so and so [a priest] is a son of a woman who had [formerly] been divorced or a haluzah,” it is not said that each witness should himself be as if he was born of a divorcee or a haluzah; rather he receives forty [lashes].
According to Jewish law a kohen (a priest) is not allowed to marry a divorcee or a woman who had undergone the process known as “halitzah”, the refusal of the levirate marriage (marriage to the husband’s brother upon the husband’s death when he had no children, see Deuteronomy 25:5-10). A child born of the union of a priest and a divorcee or a halutzah loses his priestly status. If witnesses falsely testify that a priest is really the son of a divorcee or a halutzah, they are attempting to cause him to forfeit his status. Although in general a perjuring witness is punished with the punishment which he tried to impose, in this case it is impossible to do so. Rather he is punished by being lashed forty times (Deuteronomy 25:3).
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Bartenura on Mishnah Makkot

We don't say. If they were made zomemin and they are Kohanim we make them into the son of a divorced woman to fulfill "like they planned", as it is written (Deuteronomy 19:19) "Do to them as they planned", to them and not their children. If we made them unfit for the Temple service, and they are Kohanim, we make their children unfit forever. If you'll say let us invalidate them alone and not their children, we need to fulfill "as they planned", and this wouldn't be doing that, since they planned to invalidate the accused and his children.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

English Explanation of Mishnah Makkot

[If they say]: “We testify that so and so is guilty of [a crime entailing] exile”, it is not said that each witness should himself be exiled; rather he receives forty [lashes]. If witnesses falsely testify that another person committed a crime which entails exile (we will learn which crimes entail exile in chapter two), the perjuring witnesses are not themselves exiled. Rather they received forty lashes.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Bartenura on Mishnah Makkot

Rather they are lashed 40 times. As the verse states (Deuteronomy 25:1-2) "They vindicated the righteous one and convicted the wicked one then it will be if the wicked one deserves to be beaten", [Just] because they convicted the wicked one it will be that he deserves to be beaten? Rather, [it is referring to] witnesses that made wicked a righteous one and came another set of witnesses and they vindicated the original righteous one and changed these [first witnesses] into wicked ones, if that will be then beat the wicked one [with lashes].
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

English Explanation of Mishnah Makkot

[If they say:] “We testify that so and so divorced his wife and has not paid her kethubah” seeing that either today or tomorrow he [the husband] will pay her kethubah, the assessment should be made how much a man will be willing to pay [now] for the ownership of her kethubah, on the condition that if she should be widowed or divorced [he will take it over] but if she should die, her husband will inherit her [estate including the kethubah]. If a person falsely testifies that a man divorced his wife and did not pay her kethubah (marriage settlement) it does not make sense to punish him with a fine equal to the kethubah. Since if the husband should in the future divorce his wife or die and then have to pay the kethubah in any case, by falsely testifying now the perjuring witness didn’t necessarily cause the husband the loss of the kethubah. Rather we assess how much a person would want to pay to take a risk on buying the woman’s kethubah, on condition that if she would be divorced or widowed he would get the kethubah but if she should die before her husband he would not get the kethubah (since the husband inherits his wife). This is what he kethubah is worth at the present moment, while she and her husband are still alive, and this is what the perjuring witnesses therefore have to pay.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Bartenura on Mishnah Makkot

We don't say this one goes to exile. Since it is written regarding a murderer (Deuteronomy 19:5) "He shall flee", he [the murdeer] and not zommemin.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

English Explanation of Mishnah Makkot

[If they say]: “We testify that so and so owes his friend one thousand zuz on the condition that he will pay him within thirty days”, while the debtor says “ten years”, the assessment should be made how much a man is willing to pay for the use of a thousand zuz, whether he pays them in thirty days or ten years. In this scenario the witnesses falsely testify that a certain person borrowed a thousand zuz and must pay them back within thirty days. The accused does owe the thousand zuz but must pay them back only within ten years and not thirty days. Again, in this case we cannot merely fine the perjurers one thousand zuz since in the end the accused will have to pay back the zuz. Rather the witnesses tried to cause him to lose ten years minus thirty days use of the money, and they are therefore fined whatever a person would pay to use one thousand zuz for ten years minus thirty days.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Bartenura on Mishnah Makkot

That he divorced his wife. in front of us such and such a day, and this one [the accused] says "I did not divorce her and I am not obligated to pay her ketubah.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Bartenura on Mishnah Makkot

Is it not that either today or tomorrow. Meaning what do they [the zomemin] pay to him [the accused]? If you say the entire ketubah, perhaps he will die or perhaps he will divorce her today or tomorrow and in the end pay her anyways, and then it comes out that they weren't making him lose anything.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Bartenura on Mishnah Makkot

We assess how much a person would be willing to pay for this one's ketubah. due to an uncertainty. Since if she is widowed or divorced the one who purchased the ketubah will take [the whole value], and if she dies her husband inherits her and [the purchaser] loses the money he gave [for the ketubah], and this is what the [zomemin] witnesses stipulate to the husband.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Full ChapterNext Verse