Jerusalem Talmud Sotah 6.2

משנה: אָמַר עֵד אֶחָד אֲנִי רְאִיתִיהָ שֶׁנִּיטְמֵאת לֹא הָיְתָה שׁוֹתָה. וְלֹא עוֹד אֶלָּא אֲפִילוּ עֶבֶד אֲפִילוּ שִׁפְחָה הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ נֶאֱמָנִין אַף לְפָסְלָהּ מִכְּתוּבָּתָהּ. חֲמוֹתָהּ וּבַת חֲמוֹתָהּ וְצָרָתָהּ וִיבִמְתָּהּ וּבַת בַּעֲלָהּ הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ נֶאֱמָנוֹת. לֹא לְפָסְלָהּ מִכְּתוּבָּתָהּ אָמְרוּ אֶלָּא שֶׁלֹּא תִשְׁתֶּה.

MISHNAH: If a single witness said “I saw her when she became impure”, she could not drink. Not only that, but even a slave or a slave-girl are believed to cause her to lose her ketubah. Her mother-in-law, the mother-in-law’s daughter, her co-wife, her sister-in-law, and her husband’s daughter are trustworthy. They said this not to make her lose her ketubah but that she could not drink.

הלכה: אָמַר עֵד אֶחָד אֲנִי רְאִיתִיהָ שֶׁנִּיטְמֵאת כול׳. וְעֵד אֵין בָּהּ. אֵין לִי אֶלָּא עֵד. מְנַיִין אֲפִילוּ עֶבֶד אֲפִילוּ שִׁפְחָה. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר וְעֵד אֵין בָּהּ מִכָּל מָקוֹם. וּכְרִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל. דְּרִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אָמַר. כָּל מָקוֹם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר בַּתּוֹרָה עֵד סְתָם הֲרֵי אֵילּוּ בִכְלָל שְׁנֵי עֵדִים עַד שֶׁיְּפָרֵשׁ הַכָּתוּב שֶׁהוּא עֵד אֶחָד. אַשְׁכָּח תַּנֵּי. רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אוֹמֵר. שְׁנֵי עֵדִים.

HALAKHAH: “If a single witness said ‘I saw her when she became impure’,” etc. “And there is no witness against her”; not only a witness [of good standing], from where even a male or female slave? The verse says, “and there is no witness against her”, any one. And following Rebbi Ismael? As Rebbi Ismael said, at any place where the Torah mentions “a witness”, in principle that means two witnesses unless the verse makes it clear that he is a single witness. It was found stated: Rebbi Ismael says two witnesses.

מַתְנִיתָא מִשֶׁהוֹדָה רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה לְרִבִּי טַרְפוֹן. דְּתַנֵּי. רִבִּי טַרְפוֹן אוֹמֵר. עֵד אֶחָד נֶאֱמָן לְטַמְאוֹתָהּ וְאֵין עֵד אֶחָד נֶאֱמָן לְהַפְסִידָהּ מִכְּתוּבָּתָהּ. רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אוֹמֵר. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁעֵד אֶחָד נֶאֱמָן לְטַמּוֹתָהּ. כֵּן עֵד אֶחָד נֶאֱמָן לְהַפְסִידָהּ מִכְּתוּבָּתָהּ. אָמַר לוֹ רִבִּי טַרְפוֹן. אֵיכָן מָצִינוּ עֵד אֶחָד בְּמָמוֹן כְּלוּם. אָמַר לוֹ רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה. וְאֵיכָן מָצִינוּ עֵד אֶחָד בְּאֵשֶׁת אִישׁ כְּלוּם. אֶלָּא כְּשֵׁם שֶׁעֵד אֶחָד נֶאֱמָן לְטַמּוֹתָהּ. כָּךְ עֵד אֶחָד נֶאֱמָן לְהַפְסִידָהּ מִכְּתוּבָּתָהּ. חָזַר רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה לִהְיוֹת שׁוֹנֶה כְרִבִּי טַרְפוֹן.

Was our Mishnah [formulated] after Rebbi Aqiba agreed with Rebbi Ṭarphon? As it was stated: Rebbi Ṭarphon says, a single witness is believed to declare her impure but not to let her lose her ketubah. Rebbi Aqiba says, just as a single witness is believed to declare her impure, so he is believed to let her lose her ketubah. Rebbi Ṭarphon said to him: Where do we find that a single witness proves anything in money matters? Rebbi Aqiba answered him, but where do we find that a single witness proves anything in matrimonial matters? But just as a single witness is believed to declare her impure, so he is believed to let her lose her ketubah. Rebbi Aqiba changed his mind and taught following Rebbi Ṭarphon.

רִבִּי בּוּן בַּר חִיָיה בָּעֵי. חֲמוֹתָהּ שֶׁאָמְרָה. אֲנִי רְאִיתִיהָ שֶׁנִּיטְמֵאת. [וְאַתְּ אָמַר. לֹא הָיְתָה שׁוֹתָה. וּבָא אַחֵר וְאָמַר אֲנִי רְאִיתִיהָ שֶׁנִּיטְמֵאת.]מָה [הָיָה] בָא לְהֵעִיד. אִם לְהַשְׁקוֹתָהּ. כְּבָר נִרְאֵית שֶׁלֹּא לִשְׁתּוֹת. אֶלָּא לֹא בָא [אֶלָּא] לְהַפְסִידָהּ מִכְּתוּבָּתָהּ. שֶׁאֵין מַפְסִידִין מָמוֹן עַל פִּי עֵד אֶחָד. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בָּעֵי. שָׁמַע מִן הָעוֹף הַפּוֹרֵחַ. אֲנִי רְאִיתִיהָ שֶׁנִּיטְמֵאת. אַתְּ אָמַר. לא הָיְתָה שׁוֹתָה. וּבָא אֶחָד וְאָמַר. אֲנִי רְאִיתִיהָ שֶׁנִּיטְמֵאת. מָה בָא לְהָעִיד. אִם לְהַשְׁקוֹתָהּ. כְּבָר נִרְאֵית שֶׁלֹּא [לִשְׁתּוֹת]. אֶלָּא לֹא בָא אֶלָּא לְהַפְסִידָהּ מִכְּתוּבָּתָהּ. שֶׁאֵין מַפְסִידִין מָמוֹן עַל פִּי עֵד אֶחָד.

Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya asked: If her mother-in-law said “I saw her when she became impure”, [you say that she did not drink. If then somebody else came and said, “I saw her when she became impure”], about what does he testify? If to make her drink, it was clear beforehand that she does not drink. He would come only to deny her ketubah to her, but one cannot make a person lose money on the testimony of one witness! Rebbi Yose asked: If he heard from a bird flying by: “I saw her when she became impure”, you say that she did not drink. If then somebody came and said, “I saw her when she became impure”, about what does he testify? If to make her drink, it was clear beforehand that she does not drink. He would come only to deny her ketubah to her, but one cannot make a person lose money on the testimony of one witness!

מִמַּה דְרִבִּי יוֹסֵי אָמַר. פְּלוֹנִי אָכַל חֵלֶב וְהִתְרוּ בוֹ אֵינוֹ לוֹקֶה. אָמַר לוֹ אֶחָד. חֵלֶב הוּא. וְהִתְרוּ בוֹ שְׁנַיִם. לוֹקֶה. וְעִיקָּר עֵידוּתוֹ לֹא בְעֵד אֶחָד הוּא. מִמַּה דְרִבִּי יוּדָה אוֹמֵר. פְּלוֹנִי נָזִיר וְנִיטְמָא. הִתְרִיתִּי בוֹ. אֵינוֹ לוֹקֶה. אָמַר לוֹ אֶחָד. נָזִיר אַתָּה. וְהָיָה נוֹהֵג בְּנְזִירוּת עַל פִּיו. שָׁתָה יַיִן וְנִיטְמָא לַמֵּתִים. הִתְרוּ בוֹ שְׁנַיִם. לוֹקֶה. וְעִיקָּר עֵדוּתוֹ לֹא בְעֵד אֶחָד הוּא. מִמַּה דְרִבִּי מָנָא אָמַר. פְּלֹנִית כּוֹהֶנֶת וְזִינָת. וּבָא עָלֶיהָ בַּעֲלָהּ הַכֹּהֵן וְהִתְרֵיתִי בָוֹ. [אֵינוֹ] לוֹקֶה. נִסְתְּרָה בִפְנֵי שְׁנַיִם. אָמַר אֶחָד. אֲנִי רְאִיתִיהָ שֶׁנִּיטְמֵאת. וּבָא עָלֶיהָ בַעֲלָהּ כֹּהֵן. הִתְרוּ בוֹ שְׁנַיִם. לוֹקֶה. עִיקָּר עֵדוּתוֹ לֹא בְעֵד אֶחָד הוּא.

From what Rebbi Yose said, “X ate suet, and they warned him,” he is not whipped. If one person said to him, that is suet, and two warned him, he is whipped. Is not the main testimony given by a single witness? From what Rebbi Jehudah is saying: “X is a nazir, he became defiled, and I had warned him,” he is not whipped. If one person said to him, you are a nazir, and based on this testimony he behaved like a nazir, when then he drank wine or became impure in the impurity of the dead, if two warned him, he is whipped. Is not the main testimony given by a single witness? From what Rebbi Mana said, “X is the wife of a Cohen and whored; her husband, a Cohen, then had relations with her but I had warned him;” he is [not] whipped. If she went to a secluded place in the presence of two, and one said, I saw her that she became impure; when her husband, the Cohen, had relations with her but two had warned him, he is whipped. Is not the main testimony given by a single witness?