Commento su Sotah 9:8
עֵד אֶחָד אוֹמֵר רָאִיתִי אֶת הַהוֹרֵג, וְעֵד אֶחָד אוֹמֵר לֹא רָאִיתָ, אִשָּׁה אוֹמֶרֶת רָאִיתִי וְאִשָּׁה אוֹמֶרֶת לֹא רָאִית, הָיוּ עוֹרְפִין. עֵד אֶחָד אוֹמֵר רָאִיתִי, וּשְׁנַיִם אוֹמְרִים לֹא רָאִיתָ, הָיוּ עוֹרְפִין. שְׁנַיִם אוֹמְרִים רָאִינוּ וְאֶחָד אוֹמֵר לָהֶן לֹא רְאִיתֶם, לֹא הָיוּ עוֹרְפִין:
Un testimone dice "Ho visto l'assassino" e un testimone dice "Non l'hai visto"; o una donna dice "L'ho visto" e un'altra donna dice "Non l'hai visto", si sono spezzati il collo. Se un testimone dice "L'ho visto" e due dicono "Non l'hai visto", si rompono il collo. Se due dicono "Lo abbiamo visto" e uno dice loro "Non l'hai visto", non si rompono il collo.
Bartenura on Mishnah Sotah
עד אחד אומר ראיתי ועד אחד אומר לא ראית – as for example when both came at the same time [then] they would break the neck. But if one came first and said “I saw the killer”, and they believed him like two [witnesses]. For the Torah believed him, as it is written (Deuteronomy 21:1): “the identity of the slayer not being known,” but if they did know, even through one witness, they don’t break the neck, even though one witness had come and afterwards his testimony is contradicted, the second is not believed, because the words of the one is not in the of two [witnesses].
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Sotah
Introduction
This is the final mishnah which deals with the neck-breaking regulations. It discusses a case where there is some but not full testimony about the identity of the murderer.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Sotah
עד אחד אומר ראיתי ושנים אומרים לא ראית היו עורפים – as, for example, the two [witnesses] and the one are invalid witnesses, for in the case of invalid witnesses, one goes according to the majority of opinions.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Sotah
This mishnah is nearly identical to that which we saw regarding adultery and the drinking of the sotah waters above (mishnah 6:4).
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Sotah
If one witness says “I saw the murderer” and one witness says “You did not see him”; or if a woman says “I saw him” and another woman says “You did not see him”, they break its neck. The testimony of the first witness is contradicted by that of the second witness; each witness’s testimony nullifies that of the other. Since there is no testimony regarding the identity of the murderer, the heifer’s neck must be broken. The same is true if both witnesses are women.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Sotah
If one witness says “I saw him” and two say “You did not see him”, they break its neck. In this case, after one witness testifies to the identity of the murderer, two witnesses that the first witness did not see the murder. The testimony of the two outweighs that of the single witness, and the heifer’s neck must be broken.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Sotah
If two say “We saw him” and one says to them “You did not see him”, they do not break its neck. Since two witnesses say they saw the murder, a single witness who says they did not see the murder cannot nullify their testimony. Hence, the identity has been established, and the heifer’s neck is not broken.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy