Study Kiddushin folio 66A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Your ox was used by a man for an act of bestiality and is therefore unfit for an offering, and the other, the owner of the ox, is silent, the witness is deemed credible. And the tanna of the Mishnah also taught (Bekhorot 41a): And with regard to an animal that was used for a transgression or that
The Talmud comments: And each of these statements of Abaye is necessary. As, had he taught us only that first case, where the witness said someone ate forbidden fat, one might have said that he is deemed credible for the following reason: Were it not for the fact that he himself was convinced that h
But if the witness said: Your ritually pure foods were rendered ritually impure, and the accused was silent, we would say: The reason that he is silent and refrains from denying the claim is that he thinks he is not suffering any significant loss, as the food is fit for him to eat on his days of r
And had Abaye taught us only the case of: Your ritually pure food was rendered ritually impure, one might have said that the reason this witness is deemed credible is that he causes him a loss on his days of ritual purity, and therefore his silence is tantamount to a confession. But in the case of:
§ A dilemma was raised before the rabbis: If a husband is told by one witness that his wife committed adultery, and the husband remains silent, what is the halakha? Abaye said: The witness is deemed credible. Rava said: He is not deemed credible. Why not? Because it is a matter involving forbidden