TALMUD a taste of

DECEMBER 14TH

בס״ד

Rabbi Baruch Epstein

UNIT#4

UNDERSTANDING TESTIMONY

a taste of TALMUD

with Rabbi Baruch Epstein 2

ANATOMY of the GEMARA

a taste of TALMUD

EPISODE 4:UNDERSTANDING TESTIMONY

[In the case of a] bought article [how could such a situation arise?] Let us ascertain [from the seller] which of the buyers he

accepted payment from? This case is one in which the seller took

money from the two purchasers – intentionally from one, and unintentionally from the other – and we do not know from

whom he took it with intent to sell, and from whom he unintentionally took it.

THE QUESTION: Regarding the above case, where two people paid for an item, the obvious

next step would be to ask the owner to whom he had intended to sell it. Why would his testimony not suffice to establish this?

Rashi says that even if the seller claims to know, we don’t believe

him. Once the item leaves his hand and he received payment, it’s of no

interest to him, and he won’t remember accurately. Therefore his testimony is irrelevant, and we make the two litigants swear and divide it.

Following our understanding of Tosafot, that by jointly holding the item both parties have ownership, the swearing would be to instill in

them the importance of honesty and the seriousness of speaking before the court. Tosafot also understands that the seller may not be believed

as the final word to establish ownership, but he posits that the

seller’s word at least is sufficient to establish credibility instead of

taking an oath.

a taste of TALMUD

with Rabbi Baruch Epstein 3

a taste of TALMUD

with Rabbi Baruch Epstein 4

a taste of TALMUD

EPISODE 2:ALTERNATIVE ARGUMENTS

notes