Parallel
כתובות 21
Soncino English Talmud · Berean Standard Bible
they give evidence with regard to their handwriting. according to the Sages they give evidence with regard to the maneh in the deed. This is self-evident! — You might have said that Rabbi was in doubt whether they testified to their signature or to the maneh in the deed. And the difference would be when one of them died. [Here] we need two witnesses from the street to testify regarding it, because otherwise, the whole of the money less a quarter would go out by the mouth of one witness, and both here and there the stricter rule would prevail. Therefore, he teaches that it is clear to Rabbi, whether the result is lenient or strict. For Rab Judah said [that] Rab said: If two [witnesses] are signed on a document and one of them died, two [persons] from the street are required to give evidence with regard to him. In this it would be lenient according to Rabbi and it is strict according to the Rabbis. And if there are not two, but there is only one, what [then]? — Said Abaye: He shall write his signature on a piece of clay and place it before the court, and the court confirms it, and he need not testify to his own signature, and he [then] goes with that one and they [together] testify to [the signature of] the other [witness]. And only on a piece of clay but not a scroll, lest a bad man may find it and write on it whatever he likes, and We have learned: If one person produces the handwriting of another person that he owes him [money], he collects [the debt] from unmortgaged property. Rab Judah said [that] Samuel said. The halachah is according to the Sages This is obvious! [When there is a dispute between] one [authority] and many [authorities] the law is according to the many (authorities]! You might have said: since the halachah is according to Rabbi as against one of his fellow-scholars, it is also against many of his fellow-scholars, so be lets us hear [otherwise]. (Mnemonic: NaH, NaD, HaD.) R. Hinena b. Hiyya said to R. Judah, and some say (that] R. Huna b. Judah [said] to Rab Judah, and some say [that] R. Hiyya b. Judah [said] to Rab Judah: And did Samuel say so? Surely once a deed came out from the court of Mar Samuel and there was written in it, 'Whereas R. 'Anan b. Hiyya came and testified to his own signature and to that of his fellow-witness, namely, R. Hanan b. Rabbah, and whereas R. Hanan b. Rabbah came and testified to his own signature and to that of his fellow-witness, namely R. 'Anan b. Hiyya,' we have verified it, and we have confirmed it, as it is proper! — He said to him: That deed belonged to orphans, and Samuel was afraid of an erring court. Samuel thought: There might be someone who held that the halachah is [generally] according to Rabbi as against one fellow-scholar, and not as against many of his fellow-scholars, but [that] in this [the halachah is according to Rabbi] even as against many of his fellow-scholars, I will make relief, so that the orphans should not suffer any loss. Rab Judah said [that] Samuel said: Witness and judge are joined together. Rami b. Hama said: How excellent is this tradition! Said Raba: What is the excellence? What the witness testifies to the judge does not testify to, and what the judge testifies to the witness does not testify to? And indeed, when Rami b. Ezekiel came he said: Do not heed those rules which my brother Judah laid down in the name of Samuel.
—
Rabbanai, the brother of R. Hiyya b. Abba, came to buy sesame and he said: Thus Samuel said: Witness and judge are joined together. Amemar said: How excellent is this tradition! Said R. Ashi to Amemar: Because the father of your mother praised it, you also praise it! Raba has already refuted it. R. Safra said [that] R. Abba said [that] R. Isaac b. Samuel b. Martha said [that] R. Huna said, and some say [that] R. Huna said [that] Rab said: If three sit together to confirm a deed, and two [of them] know the signatures of the witnesses and one does not know, before they sign, they may testify before him, and he [then] signs [with them]; after they have signed, they may not testify before him and he may not sign. But do we write [the attestation]? Did not R. Papi say in the name of Raba: The judge's attestation which is written before the witnesses give evidence as to their signatures is invalid, because it looks like a lie? [And] here also it looks like a lie! — But say: Before they have written [the attestation] they may testify before him and he [then] signs [with them]; after they have written [the attestation], they may not testify before him and he may not sign. We may infer from this three things. We may infer that a witness may be a judge; we may [also] infer that, if the judges know the signatures of the witnesses, there is no need to testify before them; and [again] we may infer that, if the judges do not know the signatures of the witnesses, it is necessary to give evidence before every one. R. Ashi demurred to this: Agreed that we may infer from it that a witness may be a judge, but [how can we infer from it that], if the judges know the signatures of the witnesses, there is no need to testify before them? Perhaps, indeed, I can say to you [that] this is necessary, but it is different here, because the telling has been fulfilled before one. And [further, how can we infer from It that], if the judges do not know the signatures of the witnesses, it is necessary to give evidence before every one? Perhaps, indeed, I can say to you [that] this is not necessary, but it is different here, because the telling would not have been fulfilled at all. R. Abba sat and reported this law, that a witness may be a judge. R. Safra [then] objected to R. Abba: If three saw it and they are [of] the court, two shall stand up and set [two] of their fellows beside the one, and they shall testify before them, and [then] they say: Hallowed is the new moon, hallowed; for one person is not believed by himself. Now, if you assume that a witness may be a judge, what do we want all this for? Let them sit in their places and proclaim [the new moon] is hallowed! — He said to him: That was also difficult to me, and I asked R. Isaac b. Samuel b. Martha. and R. Isaac [asked] R. Huna, and R. Huna [asked] Hiyya b. Rab, and Hiyya b. Rab [asked] Rab, and he said to them: Leave alone the testimony as to the new moon, [for it is] Biblical, and the confirmation of documents is Rabbinic. R. Abba said [that] R. Huna said [that] Rab said: If three sit to confirm a document and an objection is raised against one of them, they may, before they have signed [the attestation], give evidence regarding him, and he may [then] sign; after they have signed, they may not give evidence regarding him and he may not sign. On what ground was that objection raised? If the objection was on the ground of robbery,
—