May these words of Torah serve as a merit le’iluy nishmat Menachem Mendel Ben Harav Yoel David Balk, a”h.
This week we learned Shavuot 34. These are some highlights.
Shavuot 34: Would a beit din rely on a lie detector test to take money?
Our gemara discusses the degree of evidence a court needs to take money from a person. If there was a camel seen kicking and biting other camels and then we find a dead camel in the group, according to the Sages we cannot make the owner of the kicking camel pay. We do not have two witnesses who saw this camel kill the other camel. Money can only be taken from a person if our evidence is two witnesses. Rav Acha disagrees. Rav Acha rules that if we saw a camel kicking and we know it is a damaging camel, and later we find a camel from the flock dead we can be sure that the death came from the violent camel. The beit din will convict the owner of the kicking camel. The beit din will make the owner of the kicking camel pay for the camel that was killed. Rambam (Hilchot Nizkei Mamon 8:14) and Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 408:2) both rule like the Sages. Our estimates are not enough to take money. Only the evidence of two witnesses testifying is strong-enough proof for the court to take money from a person.
Maharik (Siman 129) points out that in our gemara, monetary law is equated with laws of life and death. In our gemara we also learn that in regards to life and death, even a case of overwhelming circumstantial evidence is not enough to enable a court to put someone to death. The Gemara relates a story about Rabbi Shimon ben Shetach. Rabbi Shimon ben Shetach saw a man running after another man into a ruin. He ran after them. When Rabbi Shimon ben Shetach arrived at the deserted ruin he found the pursuer with a knife dripping with blood and the pursued stabbed and breathing his last breaths. Rabbi Shimon ben Shetach declared, “Either me or you killed this man. I know it was not me. But, I cannot do anything to you because the Torah states that a man is to be put to death by the testimony of two witnesses; he cannot be put to death by the words of a single witness. May the Almighty punish you.” A snake came and bit the pursuer and he died. The Gemara states that Rav Acha would not have agreed with the statement of Rabbi Shimon ben Shetach. Our gemara links money to death. Since we rule like the Sages, and not like Rav Acha, in regard to taking money from a person, even if there is overwhelming circumstantial evidence, like there was in the case of Rabbi Shimon ben Shetach, we cannot take the money from the person.
In light of this ruling, Shu”t Emek Yehoshua (Chelek Bet Siman 14) rules that a lie detector test would not create enough certainty for a court to take money from a person. A lie-detector test is overwhelming circumstantial evidence like the case of Rabbi Shimon ben Shetach. But, Hashem has said that two witnesses are needed to put someone to death. Overwhelming circumstantial evidence is not enough to put someone to death. Our gemara equates the level of evidence a court needs to take money with the level of evidence the court needs to put someone to death. Therefore, if a man was accused of owing money and he failed the lie detector test, if we did not have two witnesses telling us that they saw him take the loan, just based on the lie-detector test the Jewish court would not make him pay.
By Rabbi Zev Reichman
(Mesivta)
Rabbi Zev Reichman teaches Daf Yomi in his shul, East Hill Synagogue.
