Study Sanhedrin folio 10A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
If someone testifies: So-and-so had sex with my wife, he and another may combine to execute him, the accused man, with his testimony, but the woman’s husband is not accepted as a witness to execute her. A person cannot testify concerning his wife or any other close relative.
The Talmud asks: What is this last scenario teaching us? Is it that we divide the statement of the witness in order to accept part of the testimony while rejecting the inadmissible part? This cannot be, as the principle in this case is identical to that case, in which the witness is not accepted to
And Rava also says: If witnesses testify: So-and-so had sex with a betrothed young woman (see Deuteronomy 22:25), without specifying the young woman in question, and they were rendered conspiring witnesses, they are executed, and they are not liable to pay money. Since they never specified the ide
And Rava also says: If they testify: So-and-so engaged in bestiality with an ox (see Leviticus 18:23), which would theoretically result in the execution of both the person and the animal, without specifying which ox, and they were rendered conspiring witnesses, they are executed, as their testimon
The Talmud asks: It seems that the case of the ox exemplifies the same principle as the case of the betrothed young woman. Why do I also need this case? This is essentially identical to that. The Talmud answers: The second case was necessary to clarify a point, because Rava raised a dilemma about i