- This topic has 20 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 5 years, 8 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
quite simple… if i walk into Beis Din and state that I owe you a million dollars, even if 100 eidim follow me in and swear that I am lying Beis din will still take my word for it and make me pay.
I’ve been waiting ten years pay up
Unless you are a shoiteh, which you clearly are if you do something like that.
Only if the toveya sues you.
Of course, this only applies to civil matters. If I walk into bais din and say that I was mechallel Shabbos, they will not execute me, even if no other witnesses come to contradict what I am stating.
The Wolf
LongBeach – not necessarily is the person “believed” (that he actually owed the other person money) but possibly because he is obligating himself to pay that person the money. (The difference would be if by “admitting” the debt, he causes damage to another). By issur, a person makes the object ossur FOR HIM, but not factually ossur. Likewise by monetary matters, it may not be factually a debt but it becomes one on him now.
I never understood the expression “like a hundred eidim” – since the testimony of two eideim is equally as strong 100 eidim, why use the (misleading) term “like 100 eidim” which implies greater validity to 100 eidim over a smaller number of eidim???
In din one cant
incriminate oneself
true or not ????
or is that criminally?if you have one lot of eydim
another lot can come and make
them eydim zomamim and be
eydim zomamim themselves
However if 100 eydim come along
it is much more unlightly anyone
would try and undermine them
making the 100 slightly more
credible????????????Loshenhora,
(1) have you not heard of the Talmudic dictum,”Ain Adom Maysim Atzmo Rosha” (a person is disbelieved on his confession that he is a rosha)? (Therefore as Wolf says, he would be that he was mechalel shabbos).
(2) Your claim that 100 eidem has advantages over 2 eidim (re: zomimim), have you not heard of the Talmudic expression,”tray k’mayoh” (two are like 100)?!
On that, if he admits (hodoas baal din) that he owes $1 million to Shimon on a loan that took place last Sunday in Lakewood, and eidim come and say that last Sunday you were with us in EY (imonu hayisa) …does he become “zomem” (so to speak, at least with regards to discrediting the debt he admitted)?!Another kasha on the expression “Hodaas baal din kmeah edim”, in truth, hodaas baal din is STRONGER tan meah eidim, for if he says he is chayov and 100 eidim say he is pottur, the ruling is that he is chayov, (not simply eidus muk’cheses – contradictory testimonies), so the expression seems to be inaccurate?! Plus my original kasha,what is the stress “k’meah eidim” – is there some special koach of 100 eidim which is not found in two eidim (tray k’meah – two are like 100)?!
A person has “control” (ba’alus) over his property, he can make his property hefker or gift it or destroy it, so because he has control over his finances, therefore he can place upon himself financial obligations (except for the financial obligation of a “knas” [fines] which is only in authority of Bais Din to impose). His hodaah can therefore be michayiv him financial obligations.
In contrast, a person is not a baal habos over his body, he cannot commit suicide, injure himself or even permanently deface his body (tattoo) , therefore he has no baalus to obligate himself capital punishments or physical pain (malkos). [This is besides the fact that such punishments are in the exclusive domain of Bais Din – as pointed out re: knas].
The question I always had, does Torah COMPLETELY rejects the idea of “confessions”, that a confessor to a murder is disbelieved (because “Ain Adom Maysim Atzmo Rosha”)?! Granted he is not punished based on his confession (which requires a criteria of aidus and has’roah), but is he not believed that he is indeed the murderer (is his testimony totally rejected and his confession is rendered meaningless)?!
I won’t compare it to viduy, when a person confesses his sins, but shouldn’t his confession to Bais Din (a viduy of sorts) be accepted as part of his teshuva – that he is accepting responsibility for his past wrongs?!
rebbitzen……..
just for kicks, look at the date on the first post, and then the second one.
record breaking bump.Obviously, 100 eidim is a quantitative exaggeration made to prove the point. The gemara could have said ten or a thousand, the point would be the same. Exaggeration (guzma) is an often-used linguistic tool in halachic literature.
rational, yes I agree that the expression of 100 is sometimes used in Talmud and Halacha as “a quantitative exaggeration made to prove the point”, such as with money: “even if pays 100 zuz…”, or in distance: “even 100 mil away…”, or by bitul: “even in 1000 it is not botel”.
However, in such examples, these is a REAL and ACTUAL difference between the lower amounts and the large amount, such as, we all agree that one zuz is worth less then 100 zuz, one mile is not as far as 100 miles, the larger amount dilutes more than a smaller amount for bitul…
But by aidus, “tray k’mayah” – two aidus are equal to 100 eidus, therefore adding a greater number HERE does not add to the weight of his hodaah.
Adaraba, it is misleading and incorrect to imply that 100 eidim give some sort of validity and greater weight as a testimonial instrument.
Hence my kasha on the expression when used in THIS particular context.
Rational/Reb,
There is a Machlokat the Marhi B Lev with the Ketzos why we say Hadda Baal Din keMah Edim: According to the Mari BL it is basically like Matanah that a person has the power to be Mechatyov himself a matana…but the Ketzos (34:4) says that it sort of a Gezeros HaKasiv. I will quote:
לכן נר’ דהא דנאמן אדם על עצמו אע”פ שהוא קרוב אל עצמו היינו משום דכן גזירת הכתוב שיהא אדם נאמן על עצמו בכל הפסולין שיש בו וכבר האיר ענינו מאור העולם רש”י בקידושין פרק האומר דף ס”ה שם הודאת בעל דין כמאה עדים ז”ל רש”י דכתיב אשר יאמר כי הוא זה הרי שסמך על מקצת הודאתו ע”כ ואם כן כי היכא דהאמין התורה שני עדים על אחרים כן האמין התורה לכל אדם על עצמו אף על גב דהוא קרוב לעצמו דקרוב לא פסלה התורה אלא על אחרים אבל על עצמו נאמן מה שאין כן לזכות דבא להעיד על אחרים משום הכי אינו נאמן
At the end of a the long piece he asks:
אלא דאכתי איכא למידק מנלן דהודאת בעל דין יותר מעדי’ ואי משום דכתיב כי הוא זה היינו דהיכא דליכא עדים דמכתשי’ לי’ ומשום מגו הוא דנאמן וכמ”ש דאי בעי יהיב לי’ במתנה אבל היכא דאיכא עדים דמכחשי לי’ דלא שייך מגו דהא מגו במקום עדים לא אמרינן ואם כן מנלן דהוא נאמן ואין לומר דהוא מסברא דהא חזינן מלשון רש”י דיליף לה מקרא דכתיב כי הוא זה ועמ”ש בסימן ל”ז סעיף י
Although the Ketzos did not answer, but we see that the 100 has a specific reason, that is to inform us that it is not JUST like Edus of a gezeros hakasiv, as the Ketzos asks. Meaning, had the gemara not stressed the “100” I would have implied it is “like” Edus but NOT more…
A person has “control” (ba’alus) over his property, he can make his property hefker or gift it or destroy it, so because he has control over his finances, therefore he can place upon himself financial obligations (except for the financial obligation of a “knas” [fines] which is only in authority of Bais Din to impose). His hodaah can therefore be michayiv him financial obligations.
you should read the Ketzos I posted earlier (the above seems like the shitah of the Mahri BL) here is the link:
http://beta.hebrewbooks.org/tursa.aspx?a=cm_x8809
” won’t compare it to viduy, when a person confesses his sins, but shouldn’t his confession to Bais Din (a viduy of sorts) be accepted as part of his teshuva – that he is accepting responsibility for his past wrongs?!”
Actually, I once saw a Pshat why you say Vidduy before you go to sleep or before YK, that it works as ‘Hodah b’fnai Bes Din’ which is Pater from K’nas when testified before the Edus testifies, which is occurs later at night, through the act of Yad kal Adom Chosem Bo!
You have against it, other than momonas, אין אדם משים עצמו רשע, so he is not believed.
Las,
What part of the הודאת בעל דין applies to אין אדם משים עצמו רשע” ?
He is not saying he committed anything other than Mechayov himself …?Suppose I am modeh that I am a troll, is that hodaas baal din or ain adom meisim atzmo rosha???
Reb,
“Suppose I am modeh that I am a troll, is that hodaas baal din or ain adom meisim atzmo rosha???That will depend:
What is the crime of a “troll” is?
Is there a plaintiff?
Is “trolling” a fact or an act?
Lastly, does “trolling” pasul one from Edus? (at least relatively i.e. here in the CR)
And if yes – is it M’d’Oraisa? or Rabannon?Gaon, Someone says I owe money for salary I did not pay them on time so he is ovar on lo solin at the same time do we say פלגינן דיבוריה?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.