Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

8

In Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpat 140:4 we learn that there is no difference whether your witnesses are dead, non-existent or unreachable. In all these cases they are treated as if they do not exist. That fact that you once had witnesses seems to have no practical application in Halacha. We actually have a fascinating case in Ketubos 23a (bottom of the ...


6

This is an argument in Rishonim. The answer is not directly stated anywhere in the Talmud. The Sefer Yereim in Siman 178 says that it is comparable to the fifth added to Teruma, where it is paid to the Beis Din to distribute to whomever they want. However, he isn't certain about it. The other option is that it is paid to the initially accused. The תועפות ...


6

Sending an "affidavit" it is a dispute between Rashi and Rabbeinu Tam. Devarim 19:15: לא יקום עד אחד באיש לכל עון ולכל חטאת בכל חטא אשר יחטא על פי שני עדים או על פי שלשה עדים יקום דבר Rashi: ולא שיכתבו עדותם באגרת וישלחו לבית דין And not that they write their testimony in a letter and send it to Beis Din Tosefos Bava Basra 40a (continued ...


5

The ketubah, like any Jewish legal document, requires the signature of two witnesses. Besides being Jewish men who are unrelated to each other (or to the bride or groom), there are other qualifications. The Shulchan Arukh (חושן משפט הלכות עדות סימן לד) rules that רשע פסול לעדות A rasha is invalidated from serving as a witness What is a rasha? ...


4

It seems from Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpat 34 that the prohibition against testifying in a situation of being ineligible to do so, at least in a case where the disqualifier is because the witness is a "rasha," is incumbent on the witness himself. The case there is where a kosher witness knows that his fellow witness is ineligible to testify, but is ...


4

The Ohr Somayach writes that logically one would have assumed they would pay the person who they testified was owed money. Meaning, do to them what they tried to do - they tried to make A owe money to B, so they should owe money to B. However, the Ohr Somayach concludes that because of דרכיה דרכי נועם, the ways of the Torah are pleasant, it would offer the ...


4

The witnesses who sign the ketubah are witnessing the ketubah -- that is, the husband's obligations to the wife. Witnesses serve the same function here as with any other legal document (debt, property sale, or even a get). The witnesses at the chupah, on the other hand, testify to the completion of that stage of the marriage. While today we generally ...


4

Pniniei Halocho of Rabbi Melamed defines valid witnesses. וכן אדם שאינו מזדהה עם הערכים שעליהם מבוססים הקידושין, היינו עם ערכי התורה, אינו יכול להיות עד בחתונה. ולכן אדם שחוטא בגילוי עריות, למשל, מקיים יחסים עם אשת איש, או עם אחותו או בתו וכדומה, פסול לעדות. וכן אדם שחשוד בגניבה פסול מלהיות עד, וכמובן שאין הבדל בין אדם שמתפרץ לבית חבירו בלילה ...


3

The Limmud for "before the punishment" is from Kaasher Zamam, not Kaasher Asu (what they planned to do, not what they succeeded in doing). With a Challal, when the Eidim are made Zomminim, the whole Challal is undone and it is as if it never happened. So in the end they were only planning, they didn't succeed, so they are still under to the din of Kaasher ...


3

There is argument among the commentaries about exactly what happened. Some say (like Rashi on verse 14) that Moshe killed the Egyptian by saying the sacred name of God. Others (like the Ibn Ezra on verse 12) say that this patently wrong and Moshe hit the Egyptian with a stone. The Ramban on verse 14 walks a middle route saying that Moshe might have ...


2

According to the medrash rabba 1 28 the man getting beaten was in fact Dassan the husband of the woman who was tricked. The Radal there #41 wants to amend the text to say she was the sister of Dassan, but either way, he had personal knowledge of what transpired, and turned around and slandered Moshe, the man who saved him, or his relative. See there also ...


2

I think what you are looking for is easiest found in Shulchan Aruch Choshen Mishpat siman 15. Siff 5 reads A dayan should judge monetary cases based on what he thinks is the truth and he has a strong idea in his heart that it is so. There in siff 3 & 4 a situation where fraud is suspect is discussed and what degree of inspection is required. The Shulchan ...


1

I've seen #2 and #3 at Sephardic weddings outside of Israel (I believe the officiating rabbi was of Algerian ancestry) as well. So I'd assume it's more of an Ashkenazic/Sephardic split than a Jerusalem/UK split, though it's certainly possible that Sephardic practice influences non-Sephardim in Jerusalem as well.


1

I found this article: http://www.din.org.il/2015/01/18/עדות-באמצעות-סקייפ/ Which confirms the view of @IsaacKotlicky regarding testimony for a wedding or divorce i.e. since this testimony is עדות לקיומי the witnesses have to be in the place, although maybe it depends on the machloket of עדות עפ"י אומדנא. However if the case requires Edut just as a ...


1

Rabbi Tzvi Hirsh Ferber, in his commentary on the Torah, Kerem HaTzvi, says: ‏ וע״ד צחות אפ״ל מה שמועה שמע ובא, כלומר למה הוצרך‏ ‏לבא הלא כבר שמע הכל, אך אינו דומה שמיעה לראיה, ודבר זה נראה מעמלק‏ ‏אעפ״י ששמע הכל מה שעשה ה׳ לפרעה וכל הקמימ על בנ״י, בכ״ז ויבא עמלק‏ ‏להלחמ ולראות כעצמו כח ה׳ כי אינו דומה שמיעה ...


1

I personally like the wikipedia standard of verifiability and I try to apply it to myself and others on the internet. If someone just states a fact as true, I usually find it suspect. If something is true, it should be possible to provide a verifiable source. Verifiable means that "I heard from a friend" doesn't work because the reader can't verify it. ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible