The Bavli, Gitin 2 amud 2, says that one person is believed when he testifies about isurin (prohibitions), and it immediately limits that to the case that the person is not testifying against an existing status quo (chazaka).

Rashi's commentary indicates how we know that one person is believed:

for the Torah believed everyone about t'ruma-tithing [i.e. that he had tithed], slaughtering [i.e. that he had slaughtered properly], and removal of [forbidden parts of the meat, i.e. that he had indeed removed them].

Tosafos jump on this:

He should not have mentioned t'ruma-tithing and slaughtering, because someone is believed about those even though there is an existing status quo of forbiddenness, because he can [or could] fix them [and get rid of the status quo].

What about removing the forbidden parts of the meat, thereby fixing the overall meat they're in? He could do that, too. Why don't Tosafos object to Rashi's example?

  • Could you ask the same question on Rashi himself s.v. hacha itchazek?
    – Joel K
    Commented Oct 23, 2019 at 8:23
  • Rashi there points out (in the gemara's answer) that we can't apply the principle of עד אחד נאמן באיסורין in a case of איתחזק איסורא from טבל and שחיטה to אשת איש, because those are בידו. Why does Rashi not also rule out learning it from ניקור for the same reason?
    – Joel K
    Commented Oct 23, 2019 at 8:52
  • lichora it's the same.
    – kouty
    Commented Oct 23, 2019 at 15:04
  • Rashi’s opinion is difficult enough: he contradicts himself in Yevamos and Chulin in the parallel Sugyos there, providing three completely different rationales why עד אחד נאמן באיסורים. B”N I’ll be able to check my notes from Gittin tomorrow and see if we discussed this enough that I can formulate an answer; please ping me if i forget.
    – DonielF
    Commented Oct 23, 2019 at 16:51
  • BTW i don't understand Tosfot. Rashi wrote them in the begining of the suggia, there was not hava amina to make the chiiluk between itchazek isura or not, after the chiluk Rashi comes to explain the kushia engendered by the chiluk and explain that teruma and schita are not standard itchazek isura because beyado letakno
    – kouty
    Commented Oct 23, 2019 at 16:52


You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .