The commandment of investigating the witnesses well: To make a formidable investigation of the testimony and to inquire about it well according to all of our ability, so as to know the root of a thing and its completely exact truth. And from the foundation of this matter, they, may their memory be blessed, said (Avot 1:1), “Be deliberate in judgment.” And it is all so that we can reflect on the thing and know the truth about it; and that we not hurry in judgment, lest we kill the innocent and cause a loss of money, because the truth is concealed. And about this is it stated (Deuteronomy 13:15), “And you shall inquire and investigate and ask well, and behold, the thing is correct truth.” And anyone who has eyes in his head will observe and see that the multitude of warnings and repetition of the matter in different words that the Torah repeated about this thing is to properly warn us about the matter; as it is a great thing and a strong pillar upon which the blood of the souls of the creatures depends.
From the laws of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Sanhedrin 40a) that each witness would be investigated with seven investigations, and these are them: In which sabbatical cycle from the seven sabbatical cycles within the Jubilee did the event occur that he is testifying about; in which year of the seven years of the sabbatical cycle; in which month of the year; on [which day] of the month; on which day of the six days of the week; at [which hour] of the day; and in what place. And even if he said, “He killed him today,” or “yesterday,” we ask him all of this.
And besides these seven investigations that are the same for all testimony, included in the commandment of investigation is if he testified that [the accused] worshiped idolatry to ask him, “Which idolatry did he worship and with which [type] of worship?” And if he testified that he profaned the Shabbat, we say to him, “With which [type of] work did he profane it and how did he do the work?” And if he testified that he ate on Yom Kippur, we say to him, “What food did he eat, and how much did he eat?” And so [too, for] all that is similar to this.
And besides all of this that we mentioned that are called investigations and inquiries — which are the essence of the testimony and with them the accused is made guilty or exempted — the court would engage in much checking of the witnesses in other matters that are not very essential to the testimony. And since they are not essential, they, may their memory be blessed, called them, checks. And they said about them (Mishnah Sanhedrin 5:2), “All who increase the checking are praiseworthy.” And what is that which is called checks? For example, “What was the killed or the killer wearing?” And likewise, we ask him, “Was the earth on the land that he was killed white or red?” and similar to these matters. And they, may their memory be blessed, said (Mishnah Sanhedrin 5:2) that with the investigations, if one witness was precise in his testimony and the second one said, “I do not know,” their testimony is nullified; but with the checks, even if both of them said, “We do not know,” their testimony [still] stands — and all the more so, if only one says, “I do not know.” And about what are these words speaking? When they did not contradict one another. But if they contradicted one another even in the checks, their testimony is nullified.
And both capital cases and financial cases are included in this commandment, as it is stated (Leviticus 24:22), “One judgment shall there be for you.” But the Sages said that in order not to close the door in front of borrowers, that we not require inquiry and investigation of the witnesses of money [cases]. How is this? [If] the witnesses said, “This one lent that one a hundred in front of us in year x” — even though they were not precise about the month and the place in which he borrowed, and not which coin the hundred was [composed of, if] their testimony was the same about the value of the hundred, their testimony stands with that. And about what are these words speaking? About admission, loans, gifts, sales and that which is similar to them. But with cases of penalties, we require inquiry and investigation, and there is no need to say with lashes and exile [that they are required]. And likewise, they, may their memory be blessed, said (Sanhedrin 32b) that if the judge sees that the case is forged, even with the cases of admissions and loans, he needs to do inquiry and investigation upon them. And if they contradicted one another in the investigations and inquiries, their testimony is nullified; but if they contradicted each other in the checks, their testimony stands. How is this? If the one said, “He borrowed in Nissan,” and the other said, “No, rather [it was] in Iyar”; or the one said, “In Jerusalem,” and the other said, “No, rather [it was] in Lod.” And so [too,] the one said, “He borrowed a barrel of wine,” and the other said, “No, rather [it was] a barrel of oil” — this is investigation and inquiry, and [so] their testimony is nullified. But if the one said, “He borrowed a black hundred,” and the second said a white hundred — and the value of both of them is the same — or the one said, “They were in the upper floor when he lent to him” and the second said on the bottom floor — this is checks and their testimony stands. [These] and the rest of its details are in Tractate Sanhedrin (Chapters 4 and 5).
And this commandment is practiced regarding money [cases] in every place and at all times by males, as it up to them to administer justice, and not to women. And regarding capital cases, lashes and penalties, it is practiced at the time that the Sanhedrin sits in its place, as I have written in the Order of Mishpatim (Sefer HaChinukh 47, 49). And one who transgresses this and does not investigate the witnesses as is fit has violated this positive commandment; and his punishment is very great, since it is a cause for the [punishing of] people and loss of money that is not according to the law. And [one who does this] is an evildoer and causes the many to sin, giving them the money of others to consume. But [about] one who judges a completely true judgment, they, may their memory be blessed, said (Shabbat 10a) that his merit is great; and they compared him metaphorically, as if he becomes a partner of the Holy One, blessed be He, in the act of creation — meaning to say, the preservation of the world and its administration.
מִצְוַת חֲקִירַת הָעֵדִים הֵיטֵב – לַחְקֹר הָעֵדוּת חֲקִירָה גְּדוֹלָה וְלִדְרֹשׁ אוֹתָהּ הֵיטֵב בְּכָל כֹּחֵנוּ, כְּדֵי לָדַעַת שֹׁרֶשׁ הַדָּבָר וַאֲמִתָּתוֹ עַל הַכִּוּוּן הַגָּמוּר. וּמִיְּסוֹד עִנְיָן זֶה אָמְרוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה (אבות א א) הָווּ מְתוּנִים בַּדִּין, וְהַכֹּל לְמַעַן נִתְיַשֵּׁב עַל הַדָּבָר וְנֵדַע בּוֹ כָּל הָאֱמֶת וְלֹא נִהְיֶה נִמְהָרִין בַּדִּין, פֶּן נָמִית הַזַּכַּאי אוֹ נַפְסִיד מָמוֹנוֹ בְּהַעֲלָמַת הָאֱמֶת, וְעַל זֶה נֶאֱמַר (דברים יג טו) וְדָרַשְׁתָּ וְחָקַרְתָּ וְשָׁאַלְתָּ הֵיטֵב וְהִנֵּה אֱמֶת נָכוֹן הַדָּבָר. כָּל אֲשֶׁר עֵינָיו בְּרֹאשׁוֹ יַבִּיט וְיִרְאֶה כִּי רִבּוּי הָאַזְהָרוֹת וְכֶפֶל הָעִנְיָן בְּמִלּוֹת שׁוֹנוֹת שֶׁתִּכְפֹּל הַתּוֹרָה בְּדָבָר זֶה הוּא לְהַזְהִירֵנוּ יָפֶה בָּעִנְיָן, כִּי דָּבָר גָּדוֹל הוּא וְעַמּוּד חָזָק שֶׁדַּם נֶפֶשׁ הַבְּרִיּוֹת מֻנָּח עָלָיו.
The commandment of investigating the witnesses well: To make a formidable investigation of the testimony and to inquire about it well according to all of our ability, so as to know the root of a thing and its completely exact truth. And from the foundation of this matter, they, may their memory be blessed, said (Avot 1:1), “Be deliberate in judgment.” And it is all so that we can reflect on the thing and know the truth about it; and that we not hurry in judgment, lest we kill the innocent and cause a loss of money, because the truth is concealed. And about this is it stated (Deuteronomy 13:15), “And you shall inquire and investigate and ask well, and behold, the thing is correct truth.” And anyone who has eyes in his head will observe and see that the multitude of warnings and repetition of the matter in different words that the Torah repeated about this thing is to properly warn us about the matter; as it is a great thing and a strong pillar upon which the blood of the souls of the creatures depends.
וְאֵין לְהַאֲרִיךְ בְּשֹׁרֶשׁ הַמִּצְוָה, כִּי נִגְלֶה הוּא.
And there is no [need] to write at length about the root of the commandment, as it is revealed to all.
מִדִּינֵי הַמִּצְוָה. מָה שֶׁאָמְרוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה (סנהדרין מ, א) שֶׁבְּשֶׁבַע חֲקִירוֹת בּוֹדְקִין כָּל עֵד, וְאֵלּוּ הֵן, בְּאֵיזוֹ שְׁמִטָּה מִשֶּׁבַע שְׁמִטּוֹת שֶׁבַּיּוֹבֵל אֵרַע הַמַּעֲשֶׂה שֶׁהוּא מֵעִיד עָלָיו, וּבְאֵיזוֹ שָׁנָה מִשֶּׁבַע שָׁנִים שֶׁבַּשְּׁמִטָּה, וּבְאֵיזֶה חֹדֶשׁ מִן הַשָּׁנָה, וּבְכַמָּה יָמִים בַּחֹדֶשׁ, וּבְאֵיזֶה יוֹם מִשֵּׁשֶׁת יְמֵי הַשָּׁבוּעַ, וּבְכַמָּה שָׁעוֹת בַּיּוֹם, וּבְאֵיזֶה מָקוֹם, וַאֲפִלּוּ אָמַר הַיּוֹם הֲרָגוֹ אוֹ אֶמֶשׁ, שׁוֹאֲלִין אוֹתוֹ כָּל זֶה.
From the laws of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Sanhedrin 40a) that each witness would be investigated with seven investigations, and these are them: In which sabbatical cycle from the seven sabbatical cycles within the Jubilee did the event occur that he is testifying about; in which year of the seven years of the sabbatical cycle; in which month of the year; on [which day] of the month; on which day of the six days of the week; at [which hour] of the day; and in what place. And even if he said, “He killed him today,” or “yesterday,” we ask him all of this.
וּמִלְּבַד שֶׁבַע הַחֲקִירוֹת אֵלּוּ שֶׁשָּׁווֹת בְּכָל עֵדוּת, יֵשׁ בִּכְלַל מִצְוַת הַחֲקִירָה לִשְׁאֹל אוֹתוֹ אִם הֵעִיד עָלָיו שֶׁעָבַד עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה אֵיזוֹ עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה עָבַד? וּבְאֵיזוֹ עֲבוֹדָה? וְאִם הֵעִיד שֶׁחִלֵּל שַׁבָּת אוֹמְרִים לוֹ, בְּאֵיזוֹ מְלָאכָה חִלְּלוֹ? וְהֵיאַךְ עָשָׂה הַמְּלָאכָה? וְאִם הֵעִיד שֶׁאָכַל בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים אוֹמְרִים לוֹ, אֵיזֶה מַאֲכָל אָכַל? וְכַמָּה אָכַל? וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּזֶה.
And besides these seven investigations that are the same for all testimony, included in the commandment of investigation is if he testified that [the accused] worshiped idolatry to ask him, “Which idolatry did he worship and with which [type] of worship?” And if he testified that he profaned the Shabbat, we say to him, “With which [type of] work did he profane it and how did he do the work?” And if he testified that he ate on Yom Kippur, we say to him, “What food did he eat, and how much did he eat?” And so [too, for] all that is similar to this.
וּמִלְּבַד כָּל זֶה שֶׁזָּכַרְנוּ, שֶׁהֵן נִקְרָאוֹת חֲקִירוֹת וּדְרִישׁוֹת, שֶׁהֵן עִקַּר הָעֵדוּת וְעִמָּהֶן יִתְחַיֵּב אוֹ יִפָּטֵר הַנִּדּוֹן וּבָהֶן יוּזְמוּ הָעֵדִים, עוֹד מַרְבִּים הַבֵּית דִּין לִבְדֹּק הָעֵדִים בְּעִנְיָנִים אֲחֵרִים שֶׁאֵינָם עִקָּר גָּדוֹל בָּעֵדוּת, וְעַל שֶׁאֵינָן עִקָּר יִקְרְאוּ אוֹתָם זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה בְּדִיקוֹת, וַעֲלֵיהֶן אָמְרוּ כָּל הַמַּרְבֶּה בִּבְדִיקוֹת מְשֻׁבָּח. וּמַהוּ זֶה שֶׁנִּקְרָא בְּדִיקוֹת? כְּגוֹן מַה הָיָה לָבוּשׁ הַנֶּהֱרָג, אוֹ הַהוֹרֵג? וּכְמוֹ כֵן שׁוֹאֲלִין אוֹתוֹ עֲפַר הָאָרֶץ שֶׁנֶּהֱרַג עָלֶיהָ, אִם הָיָה לָבָן אוֹ אָדֹם? וְכַיּוֹצֵא בְּעִנְיָנִים אֵלֶּה. וְאָמְרוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה (שם) שֶׁבַּחֲקִירוֹת אִם כִּוֵּן הָעֵד הָאֶחָד עֵדוּתוֹ וְהַשֵּׁנִי אוֹמֵר אֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ, עֵדוּתָן בְּטֵלָה, אֲבָל בִּבְדִיקוֹת אֲפִלּוּ שְׁנֵיהֶם אוֹמְרִים אֵין אָנוּ יוֹדְעִין, עֵדוּתָן קַיֶּמֶת. וְכָל שֶׁכֵּן אִם אָמַר הָאֶחָד לְבַד אֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ. וּבַמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים? בְּשֶׁלֹּא הִכְחִישׁוּ זֶה אֶת זֶה, אֲבָל הִכְחִישׁוּ זֶה אֶת זֶה אֲפִלּוּ בַּבְּדִיקוֹת, עֵדוּתָן בְּטֵלָה.
And besides all of this that we mentioned that are called investigations and inquiries — which are the essence of the testimony and with them the accused is made guilty or exempted — the court would engage in much checking of the witnesses in other matters that are not very essential to the testimony. And since they are not essential, they, may their memory be blessed, called them, checks. And they said about them (Mishnah Sanhedrin 5:2), “All who increase the checking are praiseworthy.” And what is that which is called checks? For example, “What was the killed or the killer wearing?” And likewise, we ask him, “Was the earth on the land that he was killed white or red?” and similar to these matters. And they, may their memory be blessed, said (Mishnah Sanhedrin 5:2) that with the investigations, if one witness was precise in his testimony and the second one said, “I do not know,” their testimony is nullified; but with the checks, even if both of them said, “We do not know,” their testimony [still] stands — and all the more so, if only one says, “I do not know.” And about what are these words speaking? When they did not contradict one another. But if they contradicted one another even in the checks, their testimony is nullified.
וְאֶחָד דִּינֵי נְפָשׁוֹת אוֹ דִּינֵי מָמוֹנוֹת בִּכְלַל מִצְוָה זוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כד כב) מִשְׁפַּט אֶחָד יִהְיֶה לָכֶם. אֲבָל אָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא תִּנְעֹל דֶּלֶת בִּפְנֵי לוֹוִין, שֶׁלֹּא נַצְרִיךְ בְּעֵדֵי מָמוֹן דְּרִישָׁה וַחֲקִירָה. כֵּיצַד? אָמְרוּ הָעֵדִים בְּפָנֵינוּ הִלְוָה זֶה אֶת זֶה מָנֶה בְּשָׁנָה פְּלוֹנִית, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא כִּוְּנוּ אֶת הַחֹדֶשׁ וְאֶת הַמָּקוֹם שֶׁהִלְוָה בּוֹ וְלֹא אֶת הַמָּנֶה מֵאֵיזֶה מַטְבֵּעַ, אֲבָל עֵדוּת שְׁנֵיהֶם שָׁוֶה בְּשִׁוּוּי הַמָּנֶה עֵדוּתָן קַיֶּמֶת בְּכָךְ, וּבַמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים? בְּהוֹדָאוֹת וְהַלְוָאוֹת וּמַתָּנוֹת וּמְכִירוֹת וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהֶן, אֲבָל בְּדִינֵי קְנָסוֹת צְרִיכִין דְּרִישָׁה וַחֲקִירָה, וְאֵין צָרִיךְ לוֹמַר בְּמַלְקוּת וּבְגָלוּת. וּכְמוֹ כֵן אָמְרוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה (סנהדרין לב, ב) שֶׁאִם רָאָה הַדַּיָּן אֲפִלּוּ בְּדִינֵי הוֹדָאוֹת וְהַלְוָאוֹת שֶׁהַדִּין מְרֻמֶּה, שֶׁצָּרִיךְ לַעֲשׂוֹת בָּהֶן דְּרִישָׁה וַחֲקִירָה. וְאִם הִכְחִישׁוּ זֶה אֶת זֶה בַּחֲקִירוֹת וּדְרִישׁוֹת עֵדוּתָן בְּטֵלָה, אֲבָל אִם הִכְחִישׁוּ זֶה אֶת זֶה בַּבְּדִיקוֹת עֵדוּתָן קַיֶּמֶת. כֵּיצַד? אִם אָמַר הָאֶחָד בְּנִיסָן לָוָה וְהָאַחֵר אָמַר לֹא כִי אֶלָּא בְּאִיָּר, אוֹ שֶׁאָמַר הָאֶחָד בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם וְהָאַחֵר אָמַר לֹא כִי, אֶלָּא בְּלוֹד, וְכֵן שֶׁאָמַר הָאֶחָד חָבִית יַיִן לָוָה וְהָאַחֵר אָמַר לֹא כִי אֶלָּא חָבִית שֶׁל שֶׁמֶן, זֶהוּ חֲקִירָה וּדְרִישָׁה, וְעֵדוּתָן בְּטֵלָה. אֲבָל אִם אָמַר הָאֶחָד מָנֶה שָׁחוֹר לָוָה וְהַשֵּׁנִי אָמַר מָנֶה לָבָן וְעֵרֶךְ שְׁנֵיהֶם שָׁוֶה, אוֹ שֶׁהָאֶחָד אוֹמֵר בַּדְּיוֹטָא הָעֶלְיוֹנָה הָיוּ כְּשֶׁהִלְוָהוּ וְהַשֵּׁנִי אוֹמֵר בַּדְּיוֹטָא הַתַּחְתּוֹנָה זֶהוּ בְּדִיקוֹת, וְעֵדוּתָן קַיֶּמֶת. וְיֶתֶר פְּרָטֶיהָ, בְּמַסֶּכֶת סַנְהֶדְרִין [פרק ד ה].
And both capital cases and financial cases are included in this commandment, as it is stated (Leviticus 24:22), “One judgment shall there be for you.” But the Sages said that in order not to close the door in front of borrowers, that we not require inquiry and investigation of the witnesses of money [cases]. How is this? [If] the witnesses said, “This one lent that one a hundred in front of us in year x” — even though they were not precise about the month and the place in which he borrowed, and not which coin the hundred was [composed of, if] their testimony was the same about the value of the hundred, their testimony stands with that. And about what are these words speaking? About admission, loans, gifts, sales and that which is similar to them. But with cases of penalties, we require inquiry and investigation, and there is no need to say with lashes and exile [that they are required]. And likewise, they, may their memory be blessed, said (Sanhedrin 32b) that if the judge sees that the case is forged, even with the cases of admissions and loans, he needs to do inquiry and investigation upon them. And if they contradicted one another in the investigations and inquiries, their testimony is nullified; but if they contradicted each other in the checks, their testimony stands. How is this? If the one said, “He borrowed in Nissan,” and the other said, “No, rather [it was] in Iyar”; or the one said, “In Jerusalem,” and the other said, “No, rather [it was] in Lod.” And so [too,] the one said, “He borrowed a barrel of wine,” and the other said, “No, rather [it was] a barrel of oil” — this is investigation and inquiry, and [so] their testimony is nullified. But if the one said, “He borrowed a black hundred,” and the second said a white hundred — and the value of both of them is the same — or the one said, “They were in the upper floor when he lent to him” and the second said on the bottom floor — this is checks and their testimony stands. [These] and the rest of its details are in Tractate Sanhedrin (Chapters 4 and 5).
וְנוֹהֶגֶת מִצְוָה זוֹ לְעִנְיַן מָמוֹן בְּכָל מָקוֹם וּבְכָל זְמַן בִּזְכָרִים, כִּי לָהֶם לַעֲשׂוֹת מִשְׁפָּט, וְלֹא לְנָשִׁים. וּלְעִנְיַן דִּינֵי נְפָשׁוֹת וּמַלְקוּיוֹת וּקְנָסִין נוֹהֶגֶת בָּאָרֶץ בִּזְמַן שֶׁהַסַּנְהֶדְרִין יוֹשְׁבִין בִּמְקוֹמָם, כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתַבְתִּי בְּסֵדֶר מִשְׁפָּטִים (מצוה מז, מט) וְהָעוֹבֵר עַל זֶה וְלֹא חָקַר הָעֵדִים כָּרָאוּי בִּטֵּל עֲשֵׂה זֶה וְעָנְשׁוֹ גָּדוֹל מְאֹד, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא סִבָּה לְחַיֵּב נְפָשׁוֹת וּלְהַפְסִיד מָמוֹן שֶׁלֹּא כַּדִּין, וְהוּא רָשָׁע וּמַחְטִיא אֶת הָרַבִּים לְהַאֲכִילָם מָמוֹן שֶׁל אֲחֵרִים, וּמִי שֶׁדָּן דִּין אֱמֶת לַאֲמִתּוֹ אָמְרוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה (שבת י א) שֶׁזְּכוּתוֹ גְּדוֹלָה, וְדִמּוּ אוֹתוֹ עַל דֶּרֶךְ מָשָׁל, כְּאִלּוּ נַעֲשָׂה שֻׁתָּף לְהַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא בְּמַעֲשֵׂה בְרֵאשִׁית, כְּלוֹמַר שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּעִנְיָן, קִיּוּם הָעוֹלָם וְיִשּׁוּבוֹ.
And this commandment is practiced regarding money [cases] in every place and at all times by males, as it up to them to administer justice, and not to women. And regarding capital cases, lashes and penalties, it is practiced at the time that the Sanhedrin sits in its place, as I have written in the Order of Mishpatim (Sefer HaChinukh 47, 49). And one who transgresses this and does not investigate the witnesses as is fit has violated this positive commandment; and his punishment is very great, since it is a cause for the [punishing of] people and loss of money that is not according to the law. And [one who does this] is an evildoer and causes the many to sin, giving them the money of others to consume. But [about] one who judges a completely true judgment, they, may their memory be blessed, said (Shabbat 10a) that his merit is great; and they compared him metaphorically, as if he becomes a partner of the Holy One, blessed be He, in the act of creation — meaning to say, the preservation of the world and its administration.