---

SMG

Anyone who knows testimony for his friend, there is a positive Mitzva to testify for him in Base Din, as it says in the verse[i] והוא עד או ראה או ידע. And we learnt in the Gemara[ii] Rabba son of bar Ĉana said, one of the Rabbis who knows testimony, but it would be embarrassing for him to go to a court and testify when the judges of the court are not of equal caliber, he should not go since the obligation to render honor to the Torah is greater. That only applies when it comes to testimony about financial matters, but when it comes to testimony which would separate a person from doing something forbidden, then [as it says in the verse[iii]] אין חכמה ואין עצה ואין תבונה לנגד ה’; whenever there is profanity of G-d’s name, we do not ascribe honor to a Rabbi. A Kohen Gadol need not testify unless he is testifying to the King of the Jews, and then he goes to the great Sanhedrin and testifies there. But for other testimony, he is exempt, as we were taught in the Gemara[iv].

---

[i] Vayikra 5:1

[ii] Gem. Shavuos 30b

[iii]

[iv] Gem. Sanhedrin 18a

---

AMUDAY SHLOMO

[the Maharshal does not have a comment on this Mitzva, either because the manuscript is incomplete or this section was lost]

---

RASHI

Rashi provides the following commentary on the verse:

• ושמעה קול אלה – concerning something he witnessed, as he was sworn an oath that if he knows testimony about this matter, he must testify.

It would seem that Rashi is limiting the scope of this negative Mitzva to one who refuses to testify only after being sworn to testify. In which case, he has violated his oath by refusing to testify, in addition to violating that negative Mitzva against swearing falsely [negative Mitzva 239].

In other words, Rashi limits the obligation to testify to one who has been subpoenaed to do so or otherwise sworn to testify. In cases where the identity of a witness is not known, a litigant will be authorized to go to the Shul on Shabbos and issue a public curse against anyone who knows information about his case and refuses to come forward.

Interestingly, this obligation to come forward and testify also applies to the other party in the litigation who must share any information he has about the case, even if that results in negative consequences to himself.

Since this Mitzva is limited to those who have been subpoenaed or otherwise sworn to testify on the authority of the court, and the court does not subpoena a Kohen Gadol etc. nor grant authority to the litigant to administer an oath to them, that is why they are otherwise exempted from this Mitzva as per the SMG.

---

Discussion by SMS

See discussion on negative Mitzva 31 – Do not be silent [testify against an Evangelist], which might provide the exception to those exempted above by the SMG from testifying.

---