Reference for Shevuot 75:20

בעא מיניה רבא מרב נחמן היו חמשה תובעין אותו ואמרו לו תן לנו פקדון תשומת יד וגזל ואבידה שיש לנו בידך אמר לאחד מהן שבועה שאין לך בידי פקדון תשומת יד גזל ואבידה ולא לך ולא לך ולא לך ולא לך מהו אחדא מיחייב

- R'Aha and Rabina disagree. One says: For the particulars he is liable, but for the general statements he is not liable;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When the bailee says, 'I swear thou hast not in my possession wheat, barley, or spelt,' he is liable for each one' i.e., three offerings (for the three particulars) , but not four: we do not say that his first words ('I swear thou hast not in my possession') are themselves also an oath, meaning, 'I swear thou hast not anything in my possession.' R. Johanan's statement (that the wheat, barley and spelt combine to make up the value of a perutah) does not refer to this clause, because he is liable for three separate oaths, and there must be a perutah in each. R. Johanan's statement refers to the first clause: 'I swear thou hast not these in my possession,' he is liable only once; and in this case R. Johanan says: The wheat, barley and spelt combine to the value of a perutah.');">²⁵</span> and the other says: For the general statements he is also liable.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And he is liable for four oaths: for the three particulars, and for his opening words, which are counted as a general oath. R. Johanan's statement will hence refer to this clause too; and the wheat, barley and spelt combine to the value of a perutah to make him liable at least for one oath, the general oath; though not for the other three, if there is not a perutah in each.');">²⁶</span> But did not R'Hiyya teach: Behold, there are here fifteen sin-offerings;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If five persons claimed, each one claiming wheat, barley, and spelt, and he denied on oath the claim of each one, he is liable to bring 15 sin-offerings (more correctly, guilt-offerings) . Hence, since R. Hiyya said 15 offerings, he is counting the particulars only, for if he counted the general statements also, there would be 4 offerings for each of the 5 claimants, i.e., 20 offerings.');">²⁷</span> and if it is [as you say], there ar twenty. - This Tanna<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Hiyya.');">²⁸</span> is counting the particulars, and is not counting the general statements.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Though he may agree that altogether he has to bring 20 offerings.');">²⁹</span> And behold, R'Hiyya taught: There are here twenty sin-offerings.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So he really agrees that for the general statements he also brings offerings.');">³⁰</span> - [No!] that refers to deposit, loan, theft, an lost object.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where there are 4 particulars, i.e., 20 for the 5 claimants; but he really does not reckon the general statements.');">³¹</span> Raba inquired of R'Nahman: If five claimed from him, saying to him: 'Give us the deposit, loan, theft, and lost object which we have in thy possession,' and he said to one of them: 'I swear that thou hast not in my possession a deposit, loan, theft, and lost object; and thou hast not, and thou hast not, and thou hast not, and thou hast not;' what is the ruling? For one is he liable,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For each of the 4 claimants, apart from the first, is he liable to only one offering, because he did not mention all the particulars to each claimant; and, therefore, he will be liable to 4 offerings for the 4 claimants, and another 4 for the first claimant (because in his case he mentioned the 4 particulars) , i.e. 8 offerings in all.');">³²</span>

Explore reference for Shevuot 75:20. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.