Shabbat 145B

אלא לעדות אשה בלבד.

only for testimony that a woman’s husband died, enabling her to remarry. Only in that case can a ruling rely on hearsay testimony, and that is specifically so the woman will be allowed to remarry.

איבעיא להו: עד מפי עד לעדות בכור, מהו? רב (אמי) [אתי] אסר, ורב אסי שרי.

A dilemma was raised before the rabbis about a related matter: With regard to hearsay testimony in testimony permitting a priest to eat a firstborn animal, what is the halakha? After the destruction of the Temple, the rabbis decreed that if a priest has the firstborn offspring of a kosher animal and it becomes blemished, he must bring witnesses to testify that he did not cause the blemish. Priests were suspected of violating the prohibition against inflicting a wound on firstborn animals to enable them to eat the animals. The question here pertains to a case in which there is no one available who can testify that he saw firsthand how the animal was blemished, but there is someone who heard from an eyewitness how the blemish was caused. Rav Ami prohibited accepting hearsay testimony in this case, and Rav Asi permitted doing so.

אמר ליה רב אמי לרב אסי: והא תנא דבי מנשיא: אין עד מפי עד כשר אלא לעדות אשה בלבד! אימא: לעדות שהאשה כשרה לה בלבד. רב יימר אכשר עד מפי עד לבכור. קרי עליה מרימר: יימר שרי בוכרא. והלכתא עד מפי עד כשר לבכור.

Rav Ami said to Rav Asi: Didn’t the school of Menashya teach that hearsay testimony is only valid in testimony enabling a woman to remarry, indicating that it is not accepted in the case of a firstborn animal? Rav Asi answered: Emend the previously cited ruling and say: Hearsay testimony is only valid in testimony for which the testimony of a woman is valid. A woman’s testimony is accepted with regard to the death of a man, enabling his wife to remarry, and it is also accepted with regard to a firstborn animal. Rav Yeimar deemed hearsay testimony valid in permitting the slaughter of a firstborn animal that developed a blemish. Mareimar called him: Yeimar who permits the firstborn; Mareimar was of the opinion that testimony of that kind is invalid and cannot provide the basis to allow the animal to be slaughtered. The Talmud concludes: And the halakha is that hearsay testimony is valid with regard to a firstborn animal.