Yesterday we began the 15th chapter of our massekhet. The Torah demands the testimony of two witnesses are needed to establish a fact. Chapter 15 may be considered the continuation of chapter 10 where the topic was permitting a woman to marry another man or do yibum when there was only one witness. The rabbis were lenient in this case because of the unbearable nature of being an agunah or trusting the woman to investigate well whether her husband was truly dead. The Mishnah on daf TB Yevamot 114b highlights the case when the witness was the wife herself and she is believed and delineates the cases when she is not believed.
Today’s daf TB Yevamot 115 wonders whether one witness during a time of war is good enough to allow the woman to remarry. “A dilemma was raised before them: In the case of one witness who testifies to the death of someone during a war, what is the halakha? The Gemara explains the sides of the dilemma: The reason that one witness is deemed credible when he provides testimony concerning the death of a husband is because the husband being alive is a matter that is likely to be revealed, and one would not lie in a case of this kind. Here, too, one witness would not lie. Or perhaps the reason that one witness is trusted is because his account is supported by the fact that she herself is exacting in her investigation before she marries again. And here, since sometimes she hates him, and war is a situation that requires especially careful investigation and it is tempting for her to rely on the witness, she is not exacting in her investigation before she marries again, and therefore the testimony of one witness is not accepted.” (Sefaria.org translation)
Because of the open-endedness of this sugiyah, there are many different opinions amongst the commentators and decisive of Jewish law. What is the basis underlying doubt of this type of testimony? Is the doubt as explained in the Gemara that a person providing testimony will tell the truth and won’t lie because he knows that eventually the truth will be revealed? Or the witness is only trusted on the assumption that the wife will investigate herself that her husband is truly dead, but since there’s a possibility she hates her husband, we cannot rely upon her investigation. Consequently, one witness is not sufficient to allow her to remarry.
There those commentators who say the testimony one witness during time of war is the fear that the witness will jump to the conclusion that the husband is dead without seeing the dead body just as was in the case of a woman. “Rava said: What is the reason that one does not rely on her testimony when there is war? It is because she says what she imagines to be the case: Can it enter one’s mind that among all these people who were killed, her husband alone is saved? If you say: Since there was peace between him and her, she guards herself and waits until she actually sees that he died; even so, at times it might happen that his enemies strike him with an arrow or spear and she thinks that he is certainly dead due to the wound, and yet this is no proof that he is dead, as there are instances when someone prepares medicine [samterei] for the wounded person and he survives, despite his apparently fatal wound.” (TB Yevamot 114b, Sefaria.org translation)
Ramban and the Tosefot ד"ה מַאי טַעְמָא דְּמִלְחָמָה hold that the case of a woman testifying the death of her husband and one witness testifying the death of her husband during a time of war are not similar. The woman has a vested interest in the outcome so her testimony cannot be trusted because she will rush to testify by assuming the death. The one witness has no vested interest in the outcome and he can be believed. Since he is believed when he testifies that he saw the deceased buried, he is also believed if he only says the husband is dead.
The Rif holds that the one witness not
only has to testify that the husband is dead, but also he saw him buried for
the widow to remarry. Rebbeinu Hannaniel holds the opinion even though the
witness testifies the deceased is buried, that this doubt concerns a Torah law
(ספקא דאורייתא) whether the woman is indeed a widow or
not; consequently, the woman should not be permitted to marry until two
witnesses testified that her husband is dead. If she married another man based
on the testimony one witness, ex post facto she does not need to divorce her
new husband. Rambam explains since the one witness may jump to the conclusion
that the person is dead, he is not believed because of the chaotic nature of
war. The witness needs to testify that he saw the deceased buried.
No comments:
Post a Comment