In this Mishnah, we're going to talk about all types of witnesses who end up not telling the truth but whom we say are not obligated to bring a korban (offering) for falsely swearing about testimony. We'll talk about all the different types of claims people make that turn out to be false, but for which they still don't need to bring a korban afterward. Then we'll have different groups of people, each with a different reason why they wouldn't bring a korban. At the end of the Mishnah, we'll say that all of them would not have to bring a korban, but we're only going to say that at the end. We'll say they're exempt from bringing a korban after we list all the groups.
The first group consists of people whose claim was not about money. We learn that a person would have to bring a korban only for an oath about not giving testimony when the testimony could potentially help somebody with something monetary. If it's not monetary, they would not have to bring that korban. That's the first group: people whose claim is not monetary. The Mishnah says that someone says to two witnesses, “I am putting you under oath if you don't come and testify about me: that my lineage is a Kohen (priest), or that I'm a Levi (Levite), that I am not the son of a divorced woman, or that I am not the son of a woman who had chalitza (levirate release rite).” In all these cases, it has nothing to do with money. It's all simply yichus (lineage).
The next group is also not about money, and it's also not about the person asking for the testimony: She'ish ploni Kohen (that a certain person is a priest); She'ish ploni Levi (that a certain person is a Levite); She'eino ben gerusha (divorced woman) (that he is not the son of a divorced woman); She'eino ben chalutza (woman released through chalitza) (that he is not the son of a woman who underwent chalitza). Somebody asks two witnesses to testify about so-and-so—about somebody else, not the person who's asking, but somebody else. The testimony is that that person is a Kohen, that that person is a Levi, that that person is not the son of a divorced woman, or that the other person is not the son of a gerusha, of a chalutza, of a woman who received chalitza. So likewise, as we'll conclude, it's not about money, and it's also not about the person asking for the testimony.
The next cases we'll talk about are claims that are about money but are not about the person asking for the testimony. She'anas ish ploni et bito o pita et bito (that so-and-so raped his daughter or seduced his daughter). If a man asks two witnesses to testify about somebody who violated a different person's daughter, or seduced a different person's young daughter, then even though it's about money, because if there was a rape or a seduction, there's a kenas (penalty) that has to be paid in certain instances. So here, it is about money, but it's not about the person asking for the testimony. We'll elaborate more as we go on in the Perek (chapter), but the only time the korban chatat oleh veyored (variable sin offering) would kick in is if the person is asking for his own testimony. Here, he's asking about somebody else.
We'll conclude with a case that would be about money if not for the fact that it also involves crimes that carry the death penalty. As we know, whenever there's a death penalty and a monetary fine at the same time, the higher penalty, the higher punishment, is enforced, and the lower punishment, which would be monetary here, gets pushed to the side. They would be exempt from that payment. So here, even though technically it's about money, there's no enforcement of that money. Therefore, we'll also say that it's not a money case. Someone asks a person to testify, “My son wounded me.” Okay. A person's son hits him. That son is put to death. So even though there's also a financial penalty for hurting somebody, that penalty goes to the side, and we just focus on the death penalty. Or, “My friend wounded me”; bruising somebody carries a penalty on Shabbat. Or that they lit my stack of grain on fire on Shabbat. We're not allowed to burn somebody's grain on Shabbat. We're not allowed to burn anything on Shabbat. So in both of these cases, the higher penalty of Chilul Shabbat (desecration of Shabbat)—the death penalty for Chilul Shabbat—is enforced, and therefore the financial penalty for hurting somebody or destroying somebody's grain on Shabbat is also not enforced here. So therefore, it's not really a money case. In all of these cases, if the witnesses swore that they did not know the testimony, and then later it comes out that they did know the testimony, they would not be obligated to bring a korban because they did not cause the person asking for the testimony to lose out on money.