Mga Kaugnay na Sipi sa Deuteronomio 19:19

וַעֲשִׂ֣יתֶם ל֔וֹ כַּאֲשֶׁ֥ר זָמַ֖ם לַעֲשׂ֣וֹת לְאָחִ֑יו וּבִֽעַרְתָּ֥ הָרָ֖ע מִקִּרְבֶּֽךָ׃

ay gagawin ninyo sa kanya ang gaya ng binalak niyang gawin sa kanyang kapatid; at sa gayon ay aalisin mo ang kasamaan sa gitna mo.

Jerusalem Talmud Makkot

HALAKHAH: “How are plotting witnesses treated,” etc. Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, everything was included in do not testify against your neighbor as a false witness. As an exception, do to him as he plotted to do to his neighbor. If you can satisfy do to him as he plotted then fulfill (do not testify)7Text of the Leiden ms., to be deleted. [do to him as he plotted to do]8Text of G, to be accepted.. But if you cannot satisfy do to him as he plotted to do to his neighbor then (do not)7Text of the Leiden ms., to be deleted. satisfy do not testify against your neighbor1It is one of the Ten Commandments not to testify falsely. In addition, Deut. 19:16–20 prescribes that a “plotting” false witness has to be punished by the penalty which would have been imposed on his victim had his testimony been found true. By rabbinic definition, a “plotting” witness is one whose testimony not only is false but shown to be impossible, in that there are witnesses to the fact that he testified to be eye witness of a fact which he could not have seen since at the time it was supposed to have happened he was at another place (Sanhedrin Chapter 5, Note 3). There are cases when plotting perjury is proven but the penalty cannot be imposed. Then the false witness must be punished for breaking the Eighth Commandment, which is the standard punishment decreed for breaking any prohibition for which the penalty was not specified, fixed in Deut. 25:3 as at most 40 lashes (which, because the court marshal might err in his count, is limited to 39 lashes).
The Babli (2b) disagrees with this explanation; it classifies simple perjury as “actionless crime” for which no penalty is possible; this clearly is not the Yerushalmi’s position (cf. Ketubot 4:4 Note 196.)
. Another explanation: Do to him, not to his descendants3If the witness is not a Cohen, declaring him as son of a divorcee would not change his status at all. If he is a Cohen, declaring him as son of a divorcee would punish not only him but also his descendants, against the biblical text as explained in the Halakhah..
Magtanong sa isang RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jerusalem Talmud Makkot

Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, if two alternatives are presented to the court, one chooses one of them9As a general principle, no crime can be punished by more than one punishment. There never can be separate penalties for testifying falsely (Ex.20:13) and plotting (Deut. 19:19). This justifies the alternative presented in the preceding paragraph.
The text is copied from Terumot 7:1 Note 14; also Bava qamma 7:2, Note 30.
. This excludes matters in the Power of Heaven10This sentence refers to the topic in Terumot; it is irrelevant here..
Magtanong sa isang RabbiBookmarkShareCopy