Mesorat%20hashas for Bava Kamma 212:1

אי אמרת בשלמא נשבע כי אתו עדים מיחייב אמטו להכי מחייבינן ליה קרבן אשבועה בתרייתא הואיל ויכול לחזור ולהודות

I could quite understand that if you were to say that if witnesses appeared after he took the oath [thus proving him to be a perjurer] he would have to pay, as it would be on account of this that we should make him liable to bring sacrificial atonement<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In accordance with Lev. V, 21-26. ');">¹</span> for the oath on the last occasion, since it was always open to him to retract and admit the claim. But if you maintain that should witnesses appear after he took the oath he would be exempt, is it possible that whereas if witnesses were to have come and testified against him he would have been exempt,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 616, n. 8. ');">²</span>

Explore mesorat%20hashas for Bava Kamma 212:1. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.