Reference for Bava Metzia 8:11
מתיב מר זוטרא בריה דרב נחמן טענו כלים וקרקעות הודה בכלים וכפר בקרקעות הודה בקרקעות וכפר בכלים פטור הודה מקצת קרקעות פטור מקצת כלים חייב
And, indeed, this stands to reason, for if we were to assume that 'two' necessitates an oath, how could R. Akiba dispense with the oath in the case of 'three': this [debtor] could surely employ a ruse, In that he might think: If I say 'two' I shall have to swear; I will say 'three', so that I shall be like a restorer of a loss, and I shall be free. Therefore we must conclude that [if he says] 'two' he is also free. But does not a difficulty arise as regards R. Hiyya?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who teaches that the offer 'Here they are' is like a 'partial admission' and therefore requires an oath. Then why should 'two' not require an oath? ');"><sup>10</sup></span>
Explore reference for Bava Metzia 8:11. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.