(Please include header and footer when redistributing this material.)
_________________________________________________________________
THE DAFYOMI DISCUSSION LIST
brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE TO DISCUSS THE DAF WITH THE KOLLEL]
________________________________________________________________
Bava Basra 030: Making your self a sinner
Gidon Schneider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> asked:
how is it that we can accept the claim of the guy who says 'I only told you
to buy the land because i preffered to deal with you than with the man who
stole it from me' when this would be implicating himself as a liar - and as
we learn later, we do not accept the testimony of witnesses who put
themselves into the category of sinners.
Gidon Schneider, Cambridge, England
----------------------------------------------
The Kollel replies:
Self-implication is in general only a problem with regards to testimony.
That is, Beis Din cannot accept testimony from one who is implicating himself.
In this case the person incriminating himself is a claimant. On a basic
level he should win, since we know that he was the original owner and the
Machzik is not claiming to have bought it from him. The Machzik, who
actually has no case since he did not know for sure that the person he
bought it from was the real owner (he might be just a thief), wants to
build his case on the fact that he got advice to buy the field from the
original owner. We reject this evidence because the original owner's claim
that "I only told you etc." is sufficient to invalidate the claim of the
Machzik.
D. Zupnik
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with this text in the body of the message:
unsubscribe daf-discuss
