Commentary for Shevuot 80:22

מאן דמתני ארישא כל שכן אסיפא

- He is merely trying to slip away from him [for the moment], thinking, 'when I will have money, I will pay him.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The denial is therefore not effrontery, but an excuse to gain time; hence, he may not be speaking the truth, and he must take an oath.');">²²</span> Know [that this is so], for R'Idi B'Abin said that R'Hisda said: He who denies a loan, is fit for testimony;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For, since it is a loan, he may have spent the money, and, in order to gain time, he denies it; but he is not really dishonest; and though witnesses testify that he owes he money (and he had denied it, but not on oath) , we still assume that he merely wishes to gain time, and will pay later, and he is therefore still qualified to be accepted as a witness in a case.');">²³</span> a deposit, is unfit for testimony.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For a deposit is not intended to be spent; and where witnesses testified that at the time of denial it was in his possession, he must be considered dishonest (v. B.M. 5b) .');">²⁴</span> R'Habiba taught [R'Nahman's law] as applicable to the later clause: 'A HUNDRED DENARII OF MINE YOU HAVE IN YOUR POSSESSION;' HE SAID TO HIM, 'YES'. ON THE MORROW HE SAID TO HIM: 'GIVE THEM TO ME'; [AND THE OTHER REPLIED,] 'I HAVE GIVEN THEM TO YOU;' HE IS EXEMPT. - And R'Nahman said: But they impose upon him the consuetudinary oath. - He who applies [R'Nahman's law] to the first clause<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That even if he never admitted the claim at all he must take the consuetudinary oath.');">²⁵</span> will certainly apply it to the second clause;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For he has already admitted the claim, and therefore it is obvious at least that the claim is a valid one.');">²⁶</span>

Explore commentary for Shevuot 80:22. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.