Bava Batra 112

משלשין ביניהם

EACH SET PAYS THE CLAIMANT A THIRD. IF THREE BROTHERS TESTIFY [ONE TO EACH YEAR] EACH ALONG WITH THE SAME SECOND WITNESS, THEN THREE TESTIMONIES [OF TWO WITNESSES EACH] ARE OFFERED<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If two or three brothers testify to the same thing they are only counted as one witness, but here, as they testify to separate years, they are reckoned as separate witnesses, and each one forms a pair with the other witness. ');">¹</span>

שלשה אחים ואחד מצטרף עמהם הרי אלו שלש עדיות והן עדות אחת להזמה:

[ONE FOR EACH YEAR], BUT THE THREE ARE RECKONED AS ONE FOR THE PURPOSE OF DECLARING THE WITNESSES <i>ZOMEMIM</i>.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., they cannot be declared zomemim till the evidence of all four has been proved to be false, and in that case each pays one-sixth. ');">²</span>

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> מתניתין דלא כרבי עקיבא דתניא א"ר יוסי כשהלך אבא חלפתא אצל רבי יוחנן בן נורי ללמוד תורה ואמרי לה ר' יוחנן בן נורי אצל אבא חלפתא ללמוד תורה אמר לו הרי שאכלה שנה ראשונה בפני שנים שניה בפני שנים שלישית בפני שנים מהו אמר לו הרי זו חזקה

<b><i>GEMARA</i></b>. Our Mishnah does not agree with R. Akiba, for it has been taught: Rabbi Jose said: When my father Halafta went to R. Johanan ben Nuri to study Torah with him (according to another report, when R. Johanan ben Nuri went to Abba Halafta to study Torah with him), he said to him: Suppose a man had the usufruct of a piece of land for one year to the knowledge of two people, and for a second year to the knowledge of two other people, and for a third year to the knowledge of two others, how do we decide? He replied: This constitutes a title. Said the other: That is my opinion also, but R. Akiba differs in this respect, for he used to say: [Scripture states:] A 'matter' [shall be established by two witnesses],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XIX, 15. ');">³</span>

אמר לו אף אני אומר כן אלא שר"ע חולק בדבר זה שהיה ר"ע אומר (דברים יט, טו) דבר ולא חצי דבר

and not half a matter.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And here no two witnesses testify to more than one year of occupation, which is only a third of the matter in hand. ');">⁴</span>

ורבנן האי דבר ולא חצי דבר מאי עבדי ליה אילימא למעוטי אחד אומר אחת בגבה ואחד אומר אחת בכריסה האי חצי דבר וחצי עדות היא

And how do the Rabbis apply the principle of a 'matter' and not half a matter?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who say that each set may testify to a different year. ');">⁵</span>

אלא למעוטי שנים אומרים אחת בגבה ושנים אומרים אחת בכריסה

Shall I say that it is to invalidate the evidence where one witness says that there was one hair on her back and the other says that there was one hair in front?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The reference is to the two hairs which are the sign of puberty in a girl, v. Nid. 52a. ');">⁶</span>

אמר רב יהודה אחד אומר אכלה חטים ואחד אומר אכלה שעורים הרי זו חזקה מתקיף לה רב נחמן אלא מעתה אחד אומר אכלה ראשונה שלישית וחמישית ואחד אומר אכלה שניה רביעית וששית הכי נמי דהויא חזקה

This is not only half a matter but also half a testimony! — 7 No; they would in virtue of it invalidate the evidence where two witnesses testify that there was one hair on her back and two that there was one in front.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' But not where different witnesses testify to different years, each year being a 'whole matter'. ');">⁸</span>

א"ל רב יהודה הכי השתא התם בשתא דקא מסהיד מר לא קא מסהיד מר הכא תרוייהו בחדא שתא קא מסהדי מאי איכא למימר בין חיטי לשערי לאו אדעתייהו דאינשי:

Rab Judah said: If one witness says that the occupier took crops of wheat off the land and the other that he took crops of barley, this constitutes <i>hazakah</i>.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In spite of the discrepancy between the witnesses. ');">⁹</span>

שלשה אחין ואחד מצטרף עמהן הרי אלו שלש עדיות והן עדות אחת להזמה:

R. Nahman strongly dissented from this. On this ground, he said, if one witness said that he took crops in the first, third, and fifth years, and the other that he took crops in the second, fourth, and sixth, this would also constitute <i>hazakah</i>?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Here also there is a similar contradiction between the witnesses, since we suppose each of them to assert that in the intervening years the land was left fallow (Tosaf.). ');">¹⁰</span> — Said Rab Judah to him: Where is the parallel? There [in your case] the year referred to by the one [witness] is not referred to by the other, but here [in my case] both testify regarding the same year. And why do we ignore their discrepancy? Because people easily make a mistake between wheat and barley.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'What is there to be said? Between wheat and barley, people are not particular'. ');">¹¹</span> IF THREE BROTHERS TESTIFY EACH ALONG WITH THE SAME SECOND WITNESS, THEN THREE TESTIMONIES ARE OFFERED, BUT THE THREE ARE RECKONED AS ONE FOR THE PURPOSE OF DECLARING THE WITNESSES <i>ZOMEMIM</i>.