Jewish%20thought for Yevamot 174:21

תדע דקתני סיפא אמרו שנים אכלת חלב והוא אומר לא אכלתי פטור רבי מאיר מחייב אמר ר' מאיר קל וחומר אם הביאוהו שנים לידי מיתה חמורה לא יביאוהו לידי קרבן הקל

Now the reason [for his exemption is] because he said, 'l have not eaten'; had he, however, remained silent [the witness] would have been trusted.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And a beast would have been offered as a sin-offering though its sanctity was entirely dependent on one man's word. ');">⁵³</span> From this it is clearly evident that one witness is trusted in accordance with Pentateuchal law;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Had such evidence been Pentateuchally inadmissible, the sin-offering would consist of a Pentateuchally unconsecrated beast which must not be offered on the altar and is also forbidden to be eaten by the priests. ');">⁵⁴</span> whence is this<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The admissibility of one man's evidence. ');">⁵⁵</span>

Explore jewish%20thought for Yevamot 174:21. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.