Study Ketubot folio 20B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
And if the witness is a Torah scholar, then even if the litigant himself jogged the witness’s memory, the witness may testify. A Torah scholar would not testify if he did not actually remember the testimony himself, as in that case involving Rav Ashi, who knew testimony relating to Rav Kahana. Rav
§ Apropos recalling testimony, the Talmud adds that we learned there in a Mishnah (Oholot 16:2): Mounds of dirt that are near either to a city or a path, whether these mounds are new or whether they are old, are ritually impure due to the concern that a corpse is buried there. With regard to the mou
The Talmud asks: What is a city and what is a path in this context? If you say city means an actual city and a path is an actual path and the Mishnah is referring to any city or path, the question arises: Do we presume the existence of ritual impurity in Eretz Yisrael? But didn’t Reish Lakish say in
The Talmud asks: Granted, with regard to a mound located adjacent to the path leading to the cemetery, there is concern that a corpse is buried in the mound, as sometimes one happens to go to bury the corpse on Friday at twilight, and to avoid desecrating Shabbat, it happened that they buried the
R' Ḥanina said: The mounds could be impure, since women bury their stillborn babies adjacent to the city, as there is no funeral in that case, and because those afflicted with boils bury their arms that withered and fell from their bodies. Until a distance of 50 cubits from the city, the woman goes