Beit Din and Dayanim: Difference between revisions

# If a person hired false witnesses to testify that Reuven owes Shimon money and Reuven was awarded money based on these false edim, if in the truth Reuven didn't owe Shimon, Shimon doesn't admit that he doesn't deserve the money, the edim don't admit to lying, and the one who hired them does admit that he hired them as false witnesses, in the heavenly court he is obligated to pay Reuven for his loss.<ref>Bava Kama 55b, Shulchan Aruch CM 32:2</ref>

# Anyone who is invalid to be a judge is also invalid to be a witness except someone who loves or hates the litigant, who is invalid as a judge but valid as a witness.<ref>The gemara Sanhedrin 29a states that even according to the rabbanan who say that someone who loves or hates a litigant is valid as a witness is invalid as a judge and learn it from a pasuk. Shulchan Aruch CM 33:1 rule like the rabbanan. The Sama 33:1 explains that whereas for testimony we assume that someone who loves or hates the litigant won't lie in court and alter the facts he witnessed, the role of a judge involves much more subjective assessments which could be easily biased. </ref>

[[Image:Relatives.png|right|450px]]

# The following relationships are considered first order relationships (rishon b'rishon):  

# The halacha is that the first four categories described above are relatives and may not testify together. There is a dispute if the fifth category is considered a relative, Sephardim holding it isn't and Ashkenazim holding it is<ref>Rabbenu Tam (Bava Batra 129a s.v. iy) holds that a great grandfather is disqualified from testifying about his great grandson and the Rif (Bava Batra 56b) and Rambam (Edut 13:4) argue that it is permitted. Shulchan Aruch CM 33:2 quotes the Rambam as the primary opinion but also cites Rabbenu Tam and the Rama says that Ashkenazim hold like Rabbenu Tam. </ref>, and the sixth category certainly isn't a relative. <ref>Shulchan Aruch CM 33:2. The source for relatives being disqualified to testify against one another or together according to Gemara Sanhedrin 27b is the pasuk "לא יומתו אבות על בנים" (Devarim 24:16). The Sama 33:5 infers from the Rama that the disqualification of all relatives is biblical with the exception of someone of one generation with someone two generations apart (shlishi b'rishon). The Rama 33:2 writes that some understood the Rambam to mean that maternal relatives are only rabbinic, however, the Shach 33:1 argues at length with this opinion and says everyone agrees that maternal relatives are biblically disqualified from testimony.</ref>

# Therefore, a father and child, brother and sibling, husband and wife, uncle and nephew, grandfather and grandchild, and first cousin are all relatives who may not testify about one another.<ref>Shulchan Aruch CM 33:2</ref>

# Anyone who is disqualified to testify about a man is also disqualified to testify about his wife. Inversely, anyone who is disqualified to testify against a woman is also disqualified to testify against her husband.<ref>Gemara Sanhedrin 28b, Shulchan Aruch CM 33:3</ref> However, regarding the relationships between someone of one generation with someone two generations apart (rishon b'shelishi) if the person is only a relative through marriage he is fit to testify against him.<ref>Yerushalmi Sanhedrin 3:6 asks whether Moshe Rabbenu would have been able to testify about the wife of pinchas and Rabbi Yochanan answers that it is permitted. From here the Rosh (responsa 57:3) learns that a relative two generations apart through marriage is permitted to testify. Shulchan Aruch 33:3 codifies this for the opinion of Rabbenu Tam.</ref>

# The first two categories are disqualified even if it involves going through two marriages.<ref>Shulchan Aruch CM 33:4</ref> Some say that the second category is permitted if it goes through two marriages.<ref>Rama CM 33:4 writes that we hold like this opinion. The Bear Heitiv 33:4 says that initially this should be avoided for judges.</ref> The third category is permitted if it goes through two marriages.<ref>Shulchan Aruch CM 33:4</ref> Initially this should be avoided for witnesses signing a document.<ref>Trumat HaDeshen 226 and Rama CM 33:4 as we're concerned for a Bet Din who will make a mistake and invalidate these witnesses.</ref>