Study Makkot folio 6A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
R' Yosei says: In what case is this statement, that if one of the 3 witnesses is disqualified the entire testimony is voided, said? It is said with regard to cases of capital law, which are adjudicated stringently. But with regard to cases of monetary law, which are adjudicated more leniently, e
And when does one disqualified witness void the entire testimony? Only when the witnesses forewarned them before they performed the transgression, thereby demonstrating their desire to fill the role of witnesses in that case. But when they did not forewarn them, what shall two brothers do in a case
Talmud: Apropos the statement in the Mishnah that the halakhic status of 100 witnesses equals that of two witnesses with regard to the halakha of conspiring witnesses among other halakhot, Rava says: And that is their status only in a case where all the witnesses testified within the time required
Ravina said to him: Rava means that each and every witness must begin testifying within the time required for speaking a short phrase after the other witness completes his testimony. The result is an uninterrupted series of testimonies that combine into a single testimony.
§ The Mishnah teaches that R' Akiva says: The third witness mentioned in this verse does not come for the judges to be lenient concerning him; rather, its mention comes for the judges to be stringent concerning him and to render his halakhic status like that of these two witnesses who testified with