brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Yerushalayim
& Revach l'Neshamah - http://www.revach.net
1. A Migu claim ("believe my claim of A because I could have said B which certainly would have won") does not override witnesses.
2. There is a dispute about whether a person may clarify claims he made previously in Beis Din.
3. There is a dispute about the ongoing credibility of two sets of witnesses who contradict each other in one case.
4. The Gemara discusses a case in which witnesses contradict each other as to whether a woman's husband is dead.
5. There is a dispute about how a person can come to be known as a Kohen.
A BIT MORE
1. Witnesses establish the facts. Therefore, any claim that contradicts the testimony of two witnesses is not a valid claim.
2. Ula: He may clarify his earlier claims, even if his clarification is not the simple interpretation of what he said, as long as he does not directly contradict or retract what he previously said. Nehardai: He may not clarify his previous claims.
3. Rav Huna: When these sets of witnesses testify in other cases, they are still deemed trustworthy witnesses, because we do not know which set lied in the original case. Rav Chisda: These witnesses are no longer deemed valid witnesses, as there is a 50% chance that they are false witnesses.
4. Tana Kama: She should not remarry, but if she did she does not have to get divorced (if she married one of the witnesses who said he is dead, and she is certain that he is correct). Rebbi Menachem: She must get divorced if the witnesses testified before she remarried.
5. Rebbi Yehudah: One requires two witnesses in order for him to be considered a Kohen. Rebbi Elazar: This is only if there are people who say he is not a Kohen; otherwise, one witness is enough.
Next Daf Index to Revach for Maseches Bava Basra