Sanhedrin 31A

גברא אגברא קא רמית?

The Talmud answers: Are you setting the statement of one man against the statement of another man? Rav Ḥisda holds that a contradiction with regard to secondary details does not disqualify the testimony even in capital law, and Rav Yehuda holds that it does disqualify the testimony. Neither Sage is bound by the statement of the other.

נהרדעי אמרי: אפילו אחד אומר ״מנה שחור״, ואחד אומר ״מנה לבן״⁠ – מצטרפים.

The rabbis of Neharde’a say: Even if one says that it was a black coin and the other one says that it was a white coin their testimonies are combined.

כמאן? כרבי יהושע בן קרחה? אימר דשמעת ליה לרבי יהושע בן קרחה היכא דלא מכחשי אהדדי, היכא דמכחשי אהדדי מי אמר?

The Talmud asks: In accordance with whose opinion is this? Is it in accordance with the opinion of R' Yehoshua ben Korḥa, that as long as both witnesses testify that the defendant owes the plaintiff the same sum, the testimonies are combined? Say that you heard R' Yehoshua ben Korḥa saying that two testimonies are combined in a case where they do not contradict each other; but in a case where they contradict each other, did he say that they are combined?

אלא הוא דאמר כי האי תנא, דתניא: אמר רבי שמעון בן אלעזר: לא נחלקו בית שמאי ובית הלל על שתי כיתי עדים, שאחת אומרת מאתים ואחת אומרת מנה, שיש בכלל מאתים מנה.

Rather, the rabbis of Neharde’a stated their opinion in accordance with the opinion of that tanna, as it is taught in a baraita that R' Shimon ben Elazar says: Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel do not disagree with regard to a case of two sets of witnesses, where one set says that the plaintiff lent the defendant 200 dinars, and the other one says that he lent him 100 dinars. Both Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai agree that this is not considered a contradiction, and the testimony is accepted concerning the amount of 100 dinars, as 100 dinars is subsumed within 200, i.e., testimony concerning a large amount includes testimony concerning a smaller amount.