Los testigos no se convierten en zomemin hasta que ellos mismos se conviertan en zomemin, [es decir, con respecto a lo que les concierne, y no a lo que concierne al asesino o al asesinado, como se explica a continuación. Esto se deriva de (Deuteronomio 19:18): "Y, he aquí, un testigo falso es el testigo"—hasta que la falsedad sea inherente a las personas de los testigos mismos.] ¿Cómo es eso? Si dijeron: Testificamos sobre este hombre que mató a otro, y son refutados— ¿Cómo puedes decir esto cuando la (presunta) víctima o asesino estuvo con nosotros ese día en un lugar diferente? —no se procesan zomemin. Pero si dijeron: ¿Cómo puedes decir esto cuando estabas con nosotros ese día en un lugar diferente? se les convierte en zomemin, y son asesinados por su testimonio (de los refugiados).
Bartenura on Mishnah Makkot
Until they themselves are zommemized. That you zommemize them regarding their own [testimony] matters, and not the matters regarding the murderer and the murdered one, as it will go to explain. We derive this from the verse as it is written (Deuteronomy 19:18) "And behold the witness is a false witness", [this teaches us that they are not zommemized] until you falsify their status as witnesses.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Makkot
Introduction
Mishnah four continues to discuss the laws of perjuring witnesses.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Makkot
Witnesses are not condemned as perjurers until they themselves are incriminated; How so? If they said: “We testify that so and so killed a person” and others said to them: “How could you testify to that, as that murdered person or that [alleged] murderer was with us on that very day, at such and such a place?” [then] the witnesses are not condemned as perjurers. But, if these [other] witnesses said: “How could you testify to that, as on that very day, you were with us at such and such a place?’ [then] the former are condemned as perjurers, and are executed by their [the other witnesses] word. This mishnah contains the Rabbinic definition of the type of perjuring witnesses referred to in the Torah. According to the Rabbis witnesses who are contradicted in their testimony are not always to receive the punishment that they tried to impose upon the accused. If other witnesses come and merely contradict the first witnesses’ testimony, while the testimony of the first witnesses may be invalidated, they do not receive the punishment that they tried to impose. After all, why should the court believe the testimony of the last witnesses more than it believes the testimony of the first witnesses? Rather, only if the second set of witnesses testify that the first set of witnesses could not have even seen that which they purport to have seen are the first witnesses punished as perjurers. This is what the mishnah means when it states that the witnesses themselves must be incriminated. In other words the form of perjury referred to in the Torah is only a case where the witnesses lie about their own whereabouts at the time of the crime. If they lie about the crime itself, while they may be punished with lashes for false testimony, they do not receive the punishment they attempted to impose.
