Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) [line 4] MAH LO L'SHAKER (MIGO)
The words "Mah Lo l'Shaker" literally mean, "Why should he lie?" This concept is a legal device with which a person's claim is believed because had he wanted to lie, there was a lie that he could have used that would have been more readily believed by Beis Din. However, if a person's believability in Beis Din is based upon a Mah Lo l'Shaker and there are witnesses who testify against his claim, the witnesses are believed.

2) [line 9] TO'EN V'CHOZER V'TO'EN
(a) A litigant's defense is not accepted in court if it is not consistent with an earlier defense that he made in court (Toen v'Chozer v'To'en). Our Gemara discusses whether his second defense is believed if it does not openly contradict the first, but rather interprets the first defense in a somewhat forced manner. The Amora'im argue as to whether this slightly contradictory statement is accepted as a defense in court.
(b) The Gemara's example is when someone claims that a field belonged to his father, and he later modifies this statement by saying that he meant that it is as clear to him that he owns it as if he inherited it from his father. The Amora'im argue whether or not the court will accept the second claim.

3) [line 14] ASA ME'AVRAI - he came from outside [of Beis Din]
4) [line 15] TA'ANASEI AGMEREI - his friends and relatives taught him how to reinterpret his claim for his benefit

5) [line 17] HEICHA D'ISHTA'EI MILEI AVRAI - where he talked about his [pending] claim outside [of Beis Din]

6) [line 27] EDUS MUKCHESHES - contradictory testimony (EDIM MUKCHASHIM / EDIM ZOMEMIM)
(a) If two witnesses testify to a crime or an event and a later set of witnesses contradict their testimony by saying that the crime or event did not take place exactly as the first set of witnesses testified, all of the witnesses are termed Edim Mukchashim (contradictory witnesses), and Beis Din cannot use either testimony.
(b) If, however, two witnesses testify to a crime or an event and a later set of witnesses *disqualify* their testimony by saying that the first set of witnesses were with them in a different place at the time that the first set of witnesses claim that the act took place, the first witnesses are termed Edim Zomimin (conspiring witnesses). The Torah commands that the second set of witnesses be believed, rather than the first. In general, Edim Zomemim are punished with the punishment they tried to cause. (Devarim 19:16-21. See MISHNAH Makos 5a)

7) [line 3] SHTEI KITEI EDIM - two pairs of witnesses
8) [line 6] BA'HADEI SAHADEI SHAKAREI LAMAH LI? - Why should I be associated with false witnesses? (i.e. we do not accept either pair of witnesses in any testimony ever again)

9a) [line 12] ANAN ACHTINEI - we (Beis Din) let him go down [into the field (i.e. take possession of the field)]
b) [line 12] ANAN MASKINAN LEI - we take him up [out of the field (i.e. we dispossess his of it)]

10) [line 13] ZILUSA D'VEI DINA - the degradation of Beis Din (by repeated reversals of their rulings)

11) [line 25] TALYA B'ASHLEI RAVREVEI - (lit. it hangs on strong ropes) great Chachamim said it (that we do not worry about the degradation of Beis Din)

12) [line 26] EIN MA'ALIN LI'CHEHUNAH AL PI ED ECHAD - we do not verify (lit. bring up, elevate) a person [whose lineage was not known] as a Kohen based upon the testimony of a single witness

13) [line 27] ORERIN - (lit. protestors) witnesses who testify that he is not a Kohen

14) [line 30] REBBI SHIMON BEN HA'SEGAN - Rebbi Shimon, the son of the Deputy [Kohen Gadol]

15) [line 31] AR'AR CHAD - the protest of one [witness who testifies that he is not a Kohen]

Next daf