Ketubot 2

הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁנִּתְאַרְמְלָה אוֹ שֶׁנִּתְגָּרְשָׁה, הִיא אוֹמֶרֶת בְּתוּלָה נְשָׂאתַנִי, וְהוּא אוֹמֵר, לֹא כִי אֶלָּא אַלְמָנָה נְשָׂאתִיךְ, אִם יֵשׁ עֵדִים שֶׁיָּצָאת בְּהִנּוּמָא וְרֹאשָׁהּ פָּרוּעַ, כְּתֻבָּתָהּ מָאתָיִם. רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן בְּרוֹקָא אוֹמֵר, אַף חִלּוּק קְלָיוֹת רְאָיָה:

A woman who was widowed or divorced [and who claimed her kethubah] — if she said: He married me as a virgin, and he said: No, I married you as a widow [This refers to one who was divorced. In the instance of one who was widowed, the heirs say: Our father married you as a widow, and only a manah is owing you] — If there are witnesses that she went out with hinuma [Some say it is a canopy of myrtle that they make for virgins; and others, a veil placed over the eyes, in which one "slumbers" (mitnamnemeth)], and her hair were undone, [hanging loose on her shoulders, it being the practice to conduct virgins in this manner from their fathers' house to the wedding hall], her kethubah is two manah. R. Yochanan b. Beroka says: The distribution of parched grain is also evidence (of her being a virgin). [In the locality of R. Yochanan b. Beroka it was the practice to distribute parched grain at the weddings of virgins. And if there were no witnesses that such customs were followed at her marriage and her kethubah were lost, the husband is believed and she claims only a manah.]

וּמוֹדֶה רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בְּאוֹמֵר לַחֲבֵרוֹ שָׂדֶה זוֹ שֶׁל אָבִיךָ הָיְתָה וּלְקַחְתִּיהָ הֵימֶנּוּ, שֶׁהוּא נֶאֱמָן, שֶׁהַפֶּה שֶׁאָסַר הוּא הַפֶּה שֶׁהִתִּיר. וְאִם יֵשׁ עֵדִים שֶׁהִיא שֶׁל אָבִיו וְהוּא אוֹמֵר לְקַחְתִּיהָ הֵימֶנּוּ, אֵינוֹ נֶאֱמָן:

And R. Yehoshua concedes that if one says to his neighbor: This field was your father's and I bought it from him, he is believed, for "the mouth that forbids is the mouth that permits." [Even though above, in the first chapter, re "If she said: 'After you betrothed me, I was forced,'" R. Yehoshua differs from R. Gamliel, saying that the woman is not believed in this (even though) she thus forbids herself to the priesthood, when she could have said: I am a mukkath etz and have been permitted to the priesthood — this is so in an instance of "forbidden" or "permitted," i.e., to be forbidden to the priesthood or permitted to it. It is in this instance that R. Yehoshua differs from R. Gamliel, saying that she is not believed with a miggo ("I could have said, etc."); but here, where there is no question of forbidden or permitted, but (rather a question of) monetary loss, as when one says to his neighbor: "This field was your father's and I bought it from him," R. Yehoshua concedes to R. Gamliel that in such an instance he is believed with a miggo, having been able to say: "It is mine," so that if he says: "It was your father's, and I bought it from him," he is believed.] And if there are witnesses that it was his father's, and he says: I bought it from him, he is not believed. [The gemara explains that this Mishnah speaks of an instance in which he (the possessor of the field) ate from it only two years before (i.e., in the lifetime of) the father and one year before the son. The Mishnah apprises us that since the three years of chazakah (possession) were not completed in the father's lifetime, the year that he ate before the son does not accrue to the sum of the years of chazakah.

הָעֵדִים שֶׁאָמְרוּ כְּתַב יָדֵינוּ הוּא זֶה, אֲבָל אֲנוּסִים הָיִינוּ, קְטַנִּים הָיִינוּ, פְּסוּלֵי עֵדוּת הָיִינוּ, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ נֶאֱמָנִים. וְאִם יֵשׁ עֵדִים שֶׁהוּא כְתַב יָדָם אוֹ שֶׁהָיָה כְתַב יָדָם יוֹצֵא מִמָּקוֹם אַחֵר, אֵינָן נֶאֱמָנִין:

If witnesses said: This is our signature, but we were forced (to sign) [their lives being threatened (but if it were "money forcing," their money being "threatened" and, it goes without saying, if they said: (We signed) because of the great sum of money given us, that they are not believed; for "a man does not render himself an evildoer." For "a man is kin to himself" and is not believed to testify vis-à-vis himself neither for nor against)], or (if they said) we were minors, or we were unfit to testify, they are believed. [Here, too, (they are believed only if they claim that they were) unfit to testify because of kinship; but if because of transgression, they are not believed.] And if there are witnesses that it is their signature or if their signature were corroborated from a different source, they are not believed. [If their signature appeared on a different deed which had been certified in beth-din, and that deed came before us together with this one, and the signatures were alike (they are not believed)].

זֶה אוֹמֵר זֶה כְתַב יָדִי וְזֶה כְתַב יָדוֹ שֶׁל חֲבֵרִי, וְזֶה אוֹמֵר זֶה כְתַב יָדִי וְזֶה כְתַב יָדוֹ שֶׁל חֲבֵרִי, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ נֶאֱמָנִין. זֶה אוֹמֵר זֶה כְתַב יָדִי וְזֶה אוֹמֵר זֶה כְתַב יָדִי, צְרִיכִים לְצָרֵף עִמָּהֶם אַחֵר, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, אֵינָן צְרִיכִין לְצָרֵף עִמָּהֶם אַחֵר, אֶלָּא נֶאֱמָן אָדָם לוֹמַר זֶה כְתַב יָדִי:

If one says: This is my signature, and that is my friend's signature; and the other says: This is my signature, and that is my friend's signature, they are believed, [there being two witnesses for each signature.] If one says: This is my signature, and the other says: This is my signature, they must join another (witness) with them. [For they testify to their signature, and not to the manah (the amount) of the deed, and each signature requires two witnesses.] These are the words of Rebbi. And the sages say: They need not join another with them, but a man is believed to say: This is my signature. [For they testify to the manah of the deed, and when each says: This is my signature, there are two witnesses for the manah of the deed. The halachah is in accordance with the sages.]

הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁאָמְרָה אֵשֶׁת אִישׁ הָיִיתִי וּגְרוּשָׁה אָנִי, נֶאֱמֶנֶת, שֶׁהַפֶּה שֶׁאָסַר הוּא הַפֶּה שֶׁהִתִּיר. וְאִם יֵשׁ עֵדִים שֶׁהָיְתָה אֵשֶׁת אִישׁ וְהִיא אוֹמֶרֶת גְּרוּשָׁה אָנִי, אֵינָהּ נֶאֱמֶנֶת. אָמְרָה נִשְׁבֵּיתִי וּטְהוֹרָה אָנִי, נֶאֱמֶנֶת, שֶׁהַפֶּה שֶׁאָסַר הוּא הַפֶּה שֶׁהִתִּיר. וְאִם יֵשׁ עֵדִים שֶׁנִּשְׁבֵּית וְהִיא אוֹמֶרֶת טְהוֹרָה אָנִי, אֵינָהּ נֶאֱמֶנֶת. וְאִם מִשֶּׁנִּשֵּׂאת בָּאוּ עֵדִים, הֲרֵי זוֹ לֹא תֵצֵא:

If a woman says: I was married, but I was divorced, she is believed, for "the mouth that forbids is the mouth that permits." And if there are witnesses that she was married, and she says: I was divorced, she is not believed. If she said: I was taken captive, but I am clean (i.e., I was not forced), she is believed (to marry a Cohein), for "the mouth that forbids is the mouth that permits." And if there are witnesses that she was taken captive, and she says: I am clean, she is not believed. And if after she were married witnesses came, she does not leave. [Not that she had actually been married; but if after she had been permitted to marry, witnesses came and testified that she had been abducted, she does not "leave" her first license and she may marry ab initio. But if witnesses came that she had been defiled, even if she had several children, she leaves.]

שְׁתֵּי נָשִׁים שֶׁנִּשְׁבּוּ, זֹאת אוֹמֶרֶת נִשְׁבֵּיתִי וּטְהוֹרָה אָנִי, וְזֹאת אוֹמֶרֶת נִשְׁבֵּיתִי וּטְהוֹרָה אָנִי, אֵינָן נֶאֱמָנוֹת. וּבִזְמַן שֶׁהֵן מְעִידוֹת זוֹ אֶת זוֹ, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ נֶאֱמָנוֹת:

If two women were taken captive, [i.e., if there are witnesses that they were abducted] — If one says: I was taken captive, but I am clean, and the other says: I was taken captive, but I am clean, they are not believed. And when they testify for each other, [each one saying: My friend is clean], they are believed. [For the sages were lenient in the case of an abducted woman, accepting the testimony of one witness — even a bondsman, even a woman, even a minor "speaking in his innocence" — so long as the witness testifies that he had not left her from the time she was taken captive until she had been released by the gentiles.]

וְכֵן שְׁנֵי אֲנָשִׁים, זֶה אוֹמֵר כֹּהֵן אָנִי וְזֶה אוֹמֵר כֹּהֵן אָנִי, אֵינָן נֶאֱמָנִין. וּבִזְמַן שֶׁהֵן מְעִידִין זֶה אֶת זֶה, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ נֶאֱמָנִין:

Likewise, with two men, if one said: I am a Cohein, and the other said: I am a Cohein, they are not believed [to be given terumah]. And when they testify for each other, [each one saying: I and my friend are Cohanim], they are believed.

רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אֵין מַעֲלִין לַכְּהֻנָּה עַל פִּי עֵד אֶחָד. אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר, אֵימָתַי, בִּמְקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ עוֹרְרִין. אֲבָל בִּמְקוֹם שֶׁאֵין עוֹרְרִין, מַעֲלִין לַכְּהֻנָּה עַל פִּי עֵד אֶחָד. רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן הַסְּגָן, מַעֲלִין לַכְּהֻנָּה עַל פִּי עֵד אֶחָד:

R. Yehudah says: One is not elevated to the priesthood by the testimony of one witness. [Even if there are no "reciprocal" witnesses, and, it goes without saying, if there is a possibility of reciprocity, i.e., Testify for me, and I will testify for you.] R. Elazar said: When is this so? Where there are "objectors" [who declare him to be unfit for the priesthood; and there is no "objection" with fewer than two], but where there are no objectors, one is elevated to the priesthood by the testimony of one witness [where there are no reciprocal witnesses. And this is the difference between R. Elazar and the first tanna (R. Yehudah)]. R. Shimon b. Gamliel says in the name of R. Shimon the son of the sagan (the adjutant high-priest): One is elevated to the priesthood by the testimony of one witness. [The gemara asks: "Aren't R. Shimon b. Gamliel and R. Elazar saying the same thing!" And it concludes that they differ on the question of "combining testimony" — as when we know that this man's father was held to be a (fit) Cohein, and a report went out that he was the son of a divorcée or of a chalutzah, and he was "taken down" (from the priesthood), and then a witness came and said: I know him to be a (fit) Cohein — at which he was re-elevated; and then two witnesses came and said: He is the son of a divorcée or of a chalutzah — at which he was again taken down; and one witness came and said: I know him to be a (fit) Cohein — R. Shimon b. Gamliel says that he is re-elevated to the priesthood by the testimony of this last witness, for we "combine" him with the first witness who nullified the report by saying: I know him to be a Cohein. And even though they did not testify at the same time, their testimony is combined, and we say: Set these two who say that he is a Cohein beside the two who say that he is the son of a divorcée, and "set the man into his (original) status" (as a fit priest). And according to R. Elazar, he is not re-elevated until two witnesses testify at the same time that he is a (fit) priest. The halachah is in accordance with R. Shimon b. Gamliel, that the witnesses are combined even though they did not testify together.]

הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁנֶּחְבְּשָׁה בִידֵי גוֹיִם עַל יְדֵי מָמוֹן, מֻתֶּרֶת לְבַעְלָהּ. עַל יְדֵי נְפָשׁוֹת, אֲסוּרָה לְבַעְלָהּ. עִיר שֶׁכְּבָשָׁהּ כַּרְכּוֹם, כָּל כֹּהֲנוֹת שֶׁנִּמְצְאוּ בְתוֹכָהּ, פְּסוּלוֹת. וְאִם יֵשׁ לָהֶן עֵדִים, אֲפִלּוּ עֶבֶד, אֲפִלּוּ שִׁפְחָה, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ נֶאֱמָנִין. וְאֵין נֶאֱמָן אָדָם עַל יְדֵי עַצְמוֹ. אָמַר רַבִּי זְכַרְיָה בֶן הַקַּצָּב, הַמָּעוֹן הַזֶּה, לֹא זָזָה יָדָהּ מִתּוֹךְ יָדִי מִשָּׁעָה שֶׁנִּכְנְסוּ גוֹיִם לִירוּשָׁלַיִם וְעַד שֶׁיָּצָאוּ. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, אֵין אָדָם מֵעִיד עַל יְדֵי עַצְמוֹ:

If a woman were imprisoned by gentiles — if because of money, she is permitted to her husband, [for out of fear of losing their money, they will not be wanton with her. And this is so only when Israel has the upper hand over the idolators. In that instance she is permitted to her husband, even if he is a Cohein. (This instance is not similar to that of a captive woman; for in this instance they are afraid of losing their money.) But if the idolators have the upper hand, even (if she were imprisoned) because of money, she is forbidden to her husband if he is a Cohein. And if her husband is an Israelite, she is permitted in any event. For the wife of an Israelite who was forced is permitted to her husband]; if (she were imprisoned) because of "life," [having been sentenced to death], she is forbidden to her husband [even if he were an Israelite; for we fear that she may have cohabited voluntarily with one of them (to save her life).] If karkom (besiegers) captured a city, [the targum of "matzor" (siege) is "karkuma"], all women married to Cohanim, who are found therein are unfit [forbidden to the priesthood; for the wife of a Cohein is forbidden when she is forced. And if there is in the city one hiding place, where one woman could hide, each of the women of the city is believed to say: I hid in the hiding place and I was not defiled. And since she is believed to say: I hid, she is also believed to say: I did not hide, but I was not defiled.] And if there are witnesses for them — even a bondsman, even a bondswoman — they are believed. And a man is not believed (to testify) for himself. R. Zechariah b. Hakatzav said: [I swear by] "this abode!" (the Temple), "her hand did not leave my hand from the time the gentiles entered Jerusalem until they left" — whereupon they said to him: "A man does not testify for himself." [and if a man testified about a captive woman that she is clean, he may not marry her if he is a Cohein because of suspicion (of false testimony). And if he redeemed her from captivity with his money, he may testify for her and marry her; for one does not "throw away" his money for nothing. If he did not know that she was clean, he would not have given his money for her.]

וְאֵלוּ נֶאֱמָנִין לְהָעִיד בְּגָדְלָן מָה שֶׁרָאוּ בְקָטְנָן. נֶאֱמָן אָדָם לוֹמַר, זֶה כְתַב יָדוֹ שֶׁל אַבָּא, וְזֶה כְתַב יָדוֹ שֶׁל רַבִּי, וְזֶה כְתַב יָדוֹ שֶׁל אָחִי. זָכוּר הָיִיתִי בִפְלוֹנִית שֶׁיָּצְתָה בְהִנּוּמָא, וְרֹאשָׁהּ פָּרוּעַ. וְשֶׁהָיָה אִישׁ פְּלוֹנִי יוֹצֵא מִבֵּית הַסֵּפֶר לִטְבֹּל לֶאֱכֹל בַּתְּרוּמָה. וְשֶׁהָיָה חוֹלֵק עִמָּנוּ עַל הַגֹּרֶן. וְהַמָּקוֹם הַזֶּה בֵּית הַפְּרָס. וְעַד כָּאן הָיִינוּ בָאִין בְּשַׁבָּת. אֲבָל אֵין אָדָם נֶאֱמָן לוֹמַר, דֶּרֶךְ הָיָה לִפְלוֹנִי בַמָּקוֹם הַזֶּה, מַעֲמָד וּמִסְפֵּד הָיָה לִפְלוֹנִי בַמָּקוֹם הַזֶּה:

And these are believed to testify when they come of age, as to what they saw when they were minors. A man is believed to say: This is the signature of my father, this is the signature of my rabbi, this is the signature of my brother [and the deed is certified by his word. For the certification of deeds is a rabbinic ordinance, and the rabbis believed him in respect to rabbinical ordinances.], I remember when this woman went out with hinuma (see 2:1) and her hair was undone [in which instance she takes a kethubah of two hundred. And though money is claimed only with bona fide testimony, here it is different; for since most women marry as virgins, it is merely a recounting of events], and (I remember) when this man went from school to immerse to eat terumah [when we were youngsters in school. On the basis of such testimony, he is fed terumah d'rabanan (terumah by rabbinical ordinance), such as terumah which is taken from an unperforated pot, and the like. But he is not fed terumah d'oraitha (terumah by Torah law) by such testimony. And we do not suspect that he might have been the bondsman of a Cohein, for it is forbidden to teach a bondsman Torah.], and (I remember) when he shared (terumah) with us on the threshing floor [And we do not suspect that he might have been the bondsman of a Cohein, for terumah is not distributed to a bondsman unless his master is with him.], and (I remember) that this place was a beth-hapras [If one plows over a grave, he makes a beth-hapras of one hundred cubits, this being the estimated distance that the plow moves the bones of the dead; and the tumah (uncleanliness) of beth-hapras is by rabbinical ordinance.], and we would walk (only) until here on the Sabbath [for (Sabbath) boundaries are a rabbinical ordinance.] But a man is not believed to say: This man had a road in this place, or: this man had ma'amad and misped in this place [i.e., he had a place here to eulogize (lehaspid) his dead, and to make the standings (ma'amadoth) and the sittings that they used to make for the dead. In this, he was not believed, for it is a monetary matter and requires bona fide testimony.]