🤚 Mishnah Shevuot 4

שְׁבוּעַת הָעֵדוּת נוֹהֶגֶת בַּאֲנָשִׁים וְלֹא בְנָשִׁים, בִּרְחוֹקִין וְלֹא בִקְרוֹבִין, בִּכְשֵׁרִים וְלֹא בִפְסוּלִין. וְאֵינָהּ נוֹהֶגֶת אֶלָּא בָרְאוּיִין לְהָעִיד, בִּפְנֵי בֵית דִּין וְשֶׁלֹּא בִּפְנֵי בֵית דִּין, מִפִּי עַצְמוֹ, וּמִפִּי אֲחֵרִים, אֵין חַיָּבִין עַד שֶׁיִּכְפְּרוּ בָהֶן בְּבֵית דִּין, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, בֵּין מִפִּי עַצְמוֹ וּבֵין מִפִּי אֲחֵרִים, אֵינָן חַיָּבִין עַד שֶׁיִּכְפְּרוּ בָהֶן בְּבֵית דִּין:

The oath of testimony is practiced with regard to men but not with regard to women, with regard to non-relatives of the litigants but not with regard to relatives, with regard to those fit to testify but not with regard to those unfit to testify due to a transgression that they performed. And the oath of testimony is practiced only with regard to those fit to testify. The oath of testimony is practiced both in the presence of a court and not in the presence of a court, when the potential witness takes the oath on his own. But if the oath is administered by others and those denying that they witnessed the incident in question neither take an oath nor answer amen to the administered oath, they are not liable until they deny any knowledge of the incident in question in court. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: Whether one of the witnesses takes the oath on his own or whether the oath is administered by others, the witnesses are not liable until they deny any knowledge of the incident in question before the litigants in court.

וְחַיָּבִין עַל זְדוֹן הַשְּׁבוּעָה, וְעַל שִׁגְגָתָהּ עִם זְדוֹן הָעֵדוּת, וְאֵינָן חַיָּבִין עַל שִׁגְגָתָהּ. וּמַה הֵן חַיָּבִין עַל זְדוֹן הַשְּׁבוּעָה, קָרְבָּן עוֹלֶה וְיוֹרֵד:

And one is liable for the act of taking a false oath with intent and for an unwitting act of taking a false oath, i.e., he is unaware of the liability for taking a false oath, provided that he takes the oath with intent in terms of the testimony, i.e., he takes an oath that he has no knowledge of the matter even though he knows that he witnessed the incident. But witnesses are not liable for taking the oath if they were unwitting in terms of the testimony, i.e., they believe that they have no knowledge of the matter. And what are they liable for by taking a false oath with intent? They are liable to bring a sliding-scale offering.

שְׁבוּעַת הָעֵדוּת כֵּיצַד. אָמַר לִשְׁנַיִם בֹּאוּ וַהֲעִידוּנִי. שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁאֵין אָנוּ יוֹדְעִין לְךָ עֵדוּת, אוֹ שֶׁאָמְרוּ לוֹ אֵין אָנוּ יוֹדְעִין לְךָ עֵדוּת, מַשְׁבִּיעַ אֲנִי עֲלֵיכֶם וְאָמְרוּ אָמֵן, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ חַיָּבִין. הִשְׁבִּיעַ עֲלֵיהֶן חֲמִשָּׁה פְעָמִים חוּץ לְבֵית דִּין וּבָאוּ לְבֵית דִּין וְהוֹדוּ, פְּטוּרִים. כָּפְרוּ, חַיָּבִים עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאֶחָת. הִשְׁבִּיעַ עֲלֵיהֶן חֲמִשָּׁה פְעָמִים בִּפְנֵי בֵית דִּין וְכָפְרוּ, אֵינָן חַיָּבִין אֶלָּא אַחַת. אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, מַה טַּעַם, הוֹאִיל וְאֵינָם יְכוֹלִין לַחֲזֹר וּלְהוֹדוֹת:

Liability to bring a sliding-scale offering for taking a false oath of testimony, how so? In a case where the plaintiff said to two individuals: Come and testify on my behalf, and they replied: On our oath we do not know any testimony on your behalf, i.e., we do not have any knowledge of the matter you speak of, or in a case where they said to him: We do not know any testimony on your behalf, and he said to them: I administer an oath to you, and they said: Amen; if it was determined that they lied, these two witnesses are liable. If he administered an oath to them five times outside the court, and they came to court and admitted that they had knowledge of the incident in question and testified, they are exempt. But if they denied knowledge of the incident in court as well, they are liable for each and every one of the oaths administered to them outside the court. If he administered an oath to them five times before the court, and they denied knowledge of the incident, they are liable for taking only one false oath. Rabbi Shimon said: What is the reason for this ruling? Since once they denied that they had any knowledge of the incident they can no longer retract that denial and admit that they have knowledge of the matter. Therefore, there was only one oath of testimony, and there is no liability for the remaining oaths.

כָּפְרוּ שְׁנֵיהֶן כְּאַחַת, שְׁנֵיהֶן חַיָּבִין. בָּזֶה אַחַר זֶה, הָרִאשׁוֹן חַיָּב וְהַשֵּׁנִי פָטוּר. כָּפַר אֶחָד וְהוֹדָה אֶחָד, הַכּוֹפֵר חַיָּב. הָיוּ שְׁתֵּי כִתֵּי עֵדִים, כָּפְרָה הָרִאשׁוֹנָה וְאַחַר כָּךְ כָּפְרָה הַשְּׁנִיָּה, שְׁתֵּיהֶם חַיָּבוֹת, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהָעֵדוּת יְכוֹלָה לְהִתְקַיֵּם בִּשְׁתֵּיהֶן:

If both of the witnesses denied knowledge of the incident together, both of them are liable. If they denied knowledge one after the other, the first who denied knowledge is liable, and the second is exempt, as once the first witness denies knowledge of the incident, the second is an individual witness, whose testimony is not decisive. If one of the two witnesses denied knowledge of the incident, and the other one admitted that he had knowledge and proceeded to testify, the one who denies knowledge of the incident is liable. If there were two sets of witnesses that took the oath of testimony, and the first set denied knowledge of the matter and then the second set denied knowledge of the matter, both of the sets are liable, because the testimony can exist with either of them, as even after the first set denies knowledge of the incident, the second remains capable of providing decisive testimony.

מַשְׁבִּיעַ אֲנִי עֲלֵיכֶם אִם לֹא תָבֹאוּ וּתְעִידוּנִי שֶׁיֵּשׁ לִי בְיַד פְּלוֹנִי פִּקָּדוֹן וּתְשׂוּמֶת יָד וְגָזֵל וַאֲבֵדָה. שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁאֵין אָנוּ יוֹדְעִין לְךָ עֵדוּת, אֵין חַיָּבִין אֶלָּא אַחַת. שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁאֵין אָנוּ יוֹדְעִין שֶׁיֵּשׁ לְךָ בְיַד פְּלוֹנִי פִּקָּדוֹן וּתְשׂוּמֶת יָד וְגָזֵל וַאֲבֵדָה, חַיָּבִין עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאֶחָת. מַשְׁבִּיעַ אֲנִי עֲלֵיכֶם אִם לֹא תָבֹאוּ וּתְעִידוּנִי שֶׁיֵּשׁ לִי בְיַד פְּלוֹנִי פִּקְדוֹן חִטִּין וּשְׂעֹרִין וְכֻסְּמִין. שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁאֵין אָנוּ יוֹדְעִין לְךָ עֵדוּת, אֵין חַיָּבִין אֶלָּא אַחַת. שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁאֵין אָנוּ יוֹדְעִין לְךָ עֵדוּת שֶׁיֵּשׁ לְךָ בְיַד פְּלוֹנִי חִטִּין וּשְׂעֹרִין וְכֻסְּמִין, חַיָּבִין עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאֶחָת:

In a case where the plaintiff said to the witnesses: I administer an oath to you concerning your refusal to testify if you do not come and testify on my behalf that I have in the possession of so-and-so a deposit, and an outstanding loan, and a stolen item, and a lost item, and they lied in reply: On our oath we do not know any testimony on your behalf, they are liable for taking only one false oath of testimony. But if they lied in reply: On our oath we do not know that you have in the possession of so-and-so a deposit, and an outstanding loan, and a stolen item, and a lost item, they are liable for each and every one of the components of the claim. It is as though they took a separate oath with regard to each of the details of the claim. In a case where the plaintiff said to the witnesses: I administer an oath to you concerning your refusal to testify if you do not come and testify that I have in the possession of so-and-so a deposit of wheat, and barley, and spelt, and they lied in reply: On our oath we do not know any testimony on your behalf, they are liable for taking only one false oath of testimony. But if they lied in reply: On our oath we do not know any testimony on your behalf that you have in the possession of so-and-so wheat, and barley, and spelt, they are liable for each and every one of the components of the claim.

מַשְׁבִּיעַ אֲנִי עֲלֵיכֶם אִם לֹא תָבֹאוּ וּתְעִידוּנִי שֶׁיֵּשׁ לִי בְיַד פְּלוֹנִי נֶזֶק וַחֲצִי נֶזֶק, תַּשְׁלוּמֵי כֶפֶל, תַּשְׁלוּמֵי אַרְבָּעָה וַחֲמִשָּׁה, וְשֶׁאָנַס אִישׁ פְּלוֹנִי אֶת בִּתִּי, וּפִתָּה אֶת בִּתִּי, וְשֶׁהִכַּנִי בְנִי, וְשֶׁחָבַל בִּי חֲבֵרִי, וְשֶׁהִדְלִיק אֶת גְּדִישִׁי בְיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ חַיָּבִין:

In a case where the plaintiff said to the witnesses: I administer an oath to you concerning your refusal to testify if you do not come and testify on my behalf that I have in the possession of so-and-so an outstanding payment for damage; or an outstanding payment for half the damage, which the owner pays for damage caused by his innocuous ox goring another animal; or with regard to an outstanding payment of double the principal that a thief must pay the owner of the stolen item; or with regard to an outstanding payment of four or five times the principal that a thief pays when he stole a sheep or an ox, respectively, and then slaughtered or sold it; or in a case where the plaintiff said: I administer an oath to you concerning your refusal to testify if you do not come and testify that so-and-so raped my daughter; or, he seduced my daughter; or, that my son struck me; or, that another injured me; or, that he set my stack of grain on fire on Yom Kippur; if in any of these cases the witnesses took an oath falsely denying any knowledge of the matter on behalf of the plaintiff, these witnesses are liable for taking a false oath of testimony.

מַשְׁבִּיעַ אֲנִי עֲלֵיכֶם אִם לֹא תָבֹאוּ וּתְעִידוּנִי שֶׁאֲנִי כֹהֵן, שֶׁאֲנִי לֵוִי, שֶׁאֵינִי בֶן גְּרוּשָׁה, שֶׁאֵינִי בֶן חֲלוּצָה, שֶׁאִישׁ פְּלוֹנִי כֹהֵן, שֶׁאִישׁ פְּלוֹנִי לֵוִי, שֶׁאֵינוֹ בֶן גְּרוּשָׁה, שֶׁאֵינוֹ בֶן חֲלוּצָה, שֶׁאָנַס אִישׁ פְּלוֹנִי אֶת בִּתּוֹ, וּפִתָּה אֶת בִּתּוֹ, וְשֶׁחָבַל בִּי בְנִי, וְשֶׁחָבַל בִּי חֲבֵרִי, וְשֶׁהִדְלִיק גְּדִישִׁי בְשַׁבָּת, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ פְטוּרִין:

In a case where the plaintiff said to two witnesses: I administer an oath to you concerning your refusal to testify if you do not come and testify that I am a priest, or that I am a Levite, or that I am not the son of a priest and a divorced woman, or that I am not the son of a priest and a ḥalutza, or that so-and-so is a priest, or that so-and-so is a Levite, or that he is not the son of a priest and a divorced woman, or that he is not the son of a priest and a ḥalutza; in all these cases the witnesses are exempt from liability for taking a false oath of testimony, because these do not involve monetary claims. Likewise, if the plaintiff said to them: I administer an oath to you concerning your refusal to testify if you do not come and testify that so-and-so raped his daughter, or that he seduced his daughter, or that my son injured me, or that another person wounded me on Shabbat, or that he set my stack of grain on fire on Shabbat; in all these cases these witnesses are exempt, as each case is punishable with the death penalty, and therefore they are cases that do not involve monetary payment.

מַשְׁבִּיעַ אֲנִי עֲלֵיכֶם, אִם לֹא תָבֹאוּ וּתְעִידוּנִי שֶׁאָמַר אִישׁ פְּלוֹנִי לִתֶּן לִי מָאתַיִם זוּז וְלֹא נָתַן לִי, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ פְטוּרִים, שֶׁאֵין חַיָּבִין אֶלָּא עַל תְּבִיעַת מָמוֹן כְּפִקָּדוֹן:

If one said to witnesses: I administer an oath to you concerning your refusal to testify if you do not come and testify on my behalf that so-and-so said he is going to give me two hundred dinars and he did not give them to me, and they take false oaths that they have no knowledge of the matter, they are exempt from liability to bring an offering for taking a false oath of testimony, as one is liable for taking a false oath of testimony only in a case involving a monetary claim like a deposit in the sense that were the witnesses to testify, the individual would be liable to pay. In the case of a promise to give a gift he could claim that he merely reconsidered.

מַשְׁבִּיעַ אֲנִי עֲלֵיכֶם, כְּשֶׁתֵּדְעוּן לִי עֵדוּת שֶׁתָּבֹאוּ וּתְעִידוּנִי, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ פְטוּרִים, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁקָּדְמָה שְׁבוּעָה לָעֵדוּת:

If one said to witnesses: I administer an oath to you that when you will know testimony relevant to me you will come and testify on my behalf, these witnesses are exempt from liability for taking a false oath of testimony even if they do not testify, due to the fact that the oath preceded their knowledge of the relevant testimony.

עָמַד בְּבֵית הַכְּנֶסֶת וְאָמַר, מַשְׁבִּיעַ אֲנִי עֲלֵיכֶם שֶׁאִם אַתֶּם יוֹדְעִים לִי עֵדוּת שֶׁתָּבֹאוּ וּתְעִידוּנִי, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ פְטוּרִין, עַד שֶׁיִּהְיֶה מִתְכַּוֵּן לָהֶם:

If one stood in the synagogue and said for all to hear: I administer an oath to you that if you know testimony relevant to me you will come and testify on my behalf, these witnesses are exempt until he directs his demand to specific individuals.

אָמַר לִשְׁנַיִם, מַשְׁבִּיעַ אֲנִי עֲלֵיכֶם אִישׁ פְּלוֹנִי וּפְלוֹנִי, שֶׁאִם אַתֶּם יוֹדְעִין לִי עֵדוּת שֶׁתָּבֹאוּ וּתְעִידוּנִי, שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁאֵין אָנוּ יוֹדְעִין לְךָ עֵדוּת, וְהֵם יוֹדְעִין לוֹ עֵדוּת עֵד מִפִּי עֵד אוֹ שֶׁהָיָה אֶחָד מֵהֶן קָרוֹב אוֹ פָסוּל, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ פְטוּרִין:

If one said to two people: I administer an oath to you, so-and-so and so-and-so, that if you know testimony relevant to me you will come and testify on my behalf, and they respond: On our oath we do not know any testimony relevant to you, and they know testimony relevant to him, not based on an incident they witnessed but based on hearsay testimony, which is not valid testimony, or if one of the witnesses is found to be a relative or disqualified, these witnesses are exempt from liability for taking a false oath of testimony because they are unfit witnesses.

שִׁלַּח בְּיַד עַבְדּוֹ, אוֹ שֶׁאָמַר לָהֶן הַנִּתְבָּע מַשְׁבִּיעַ אֲנִי עֲלֵיכֶם שֶׁאִם אַתֶּם יוֹדְעִין לוֹ עֵדוּת שֶׁתָּבֹאוּ וּתְעִידוּהוּ, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ פְטוּרִין עַד שֶׁיִּשְׁמְעוּ מִפִּי הַתּוֹבֵעַ:

If the plaintiff sent the demand for their testimony by means of his slave, or in a case where the defendant said to the witnesses: I administer an oath to you that if you know any testimony relevant to the plaintiff that you will come and testify on his behalf, and they took a false oath that they have no knowledge of the matter, these witnesses are exempt from liability for taking a false oath of testimony until they will hear the demand to testify directly from the mouth of the plaintiff.

מַשְׁבִּיעַ אֲנִי עֲלֵיכֶם, מְצַוֶּה אֲנִי עֲלֵיכֶם, אוֹסֶרְכֶם אָנִי, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ חַיָּבִין. בַּשָּׁמַיִם וּבָאָרֶץ, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ פְטוּרִין. בְּאל"ף דל"ת, בְּיו"ד ה"א, בְּשַׁדַּי, בִּצְבָאוֹת, בְּחַנּוּן וְרַחוּם, בְּאֶרֶךְ אַפַּיִם וְרַב חֶסֶד, וּבְכָל הַכִּנּוּיִין, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ חַיָּבִין. הַמְקַלֵּל בְּכֻלָּן, חַיָּב, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר, וַחֲכָמִים פּוֹטְרִין. הַמְקַלֵּל אָבִיו וְאִמּוֹ בְּכֻלָּן, חַיָּב, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר, וַחֲכָמִים פּוֹטְרִין. הַמְקַלֵּל עַצְמוֹ וַחֲבֵרוֹ בְּכֻלָּן, עוֹבֵר בְּלֹא תַעֲשֶׂה. יַכְּכָה אֱלֹהִים, וְכֵן יַכְּכָה אֱלֹהִים, זוֹ הִיא אָלָה הַכְּתוּבָה בַתּוֹרָה. אַל יַכְּךָ, וִיבָרֶכְךָ, וְיֵיטִיב לְךָ, רַבִּי מֵאִיר מְחַיֵּב וַחֲכָמִים פּוֹטְרִין:

The mishna discusses the formula of an oath of testimony. If the plaintiff said to the witnesses: I administer an oath to you concerning your refusal to testify if you do not come and testify on my behalf, or even if he said: I command you, or I bind you, although he did not employ an unequivocal formula of an oath, these witnesses are liable for taking a false oath of testimony. If one administered the oath to the witnesses in the name of heaven and in the name of earth, these witnesses are exempt from liability for taking a false oath of testimony, as that is not an oath in the name of God. If one administered the oath to the witnesses in the name of alef dalet, i.e., Adonai; in the name of yod heh, the Tetragrammaton; in the name of the Almighty [Shaddai]; in the name of the Lord of Hosts [Tzevaot]; in the name of the Gracious and Compassionate One; in the name of He Who is Slow to Anger; in the name of He Who is Abounding in Loving-kindness; or in the name of any of the appellations of God, even though he did not mention the ineffable name of God, these witnesses are liable for taking a false oath of testimony. One who curses God employing any of these names or appellations of God is liable to be executed through stoning; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis deem him exempt, as they hold that one is liable for cursing God only if he employs the ineffable name of God. One who curses his father or his mother employing any of these names or appellations of God is liable to be executed through stoning; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis deem him exempt, as they hold that one is liable for cursing his father and his mother only if he employs the ineffable name of God. One who curses himself or another employing any of these names or appellations of God violates a prohibition. If one says: The Lord God shall strike you (see Deuteronomy 28:22), and likewise if one says: God shall strike you if you do not come to testify, that is a curse that is written in the Torah, and in such a case one is certainly liable if he fails to testify. If one says to the witnesses: God shall not strike you, or: God shall bless you, or: God shall benefit you if you come and testify, Rabbi Meir deems him liable, as one may infer from that statement that if he fails to testify God will strike him, or will not bless or benefit him. And the Rabbis deem him exempt because the curse is not explicitly stated.