Talmud Bavli
Talmud Bavli

Responsa for Bava Metzia 199:12

אמר רבה בר רב הונא אין אמר סומכוס אפילו בברי וברי

But according to Rabbah son of R. Huna, who maintained that the ruling of Symmachus does indeed hold good even when both are positive, why should the vendor swear? Let them divide! — Symmachus admits [that one must swear] where an oath is necessary by Biblical law, as we interpret this below.

Teshuvot Maharam

Q. A owed money to several persons. When B demanded his money from A, the latter admitted the debt but claimed that since he did not possess enough money or valuables to cover all his obligations, he preferred to divide his possessions equitably among his creditors. Since A admits, in court, his debt to B, may the latter force A to repay that debt in full, before he divides his property?
A. Since A owes money to several persons, and since he owes more than the total value of his possessions, each creditor is entitled to receive an equal share of such possessions irrespective of the amount due him. The debtor, however, may distribute his assets among his creditors in proportion to the amount due to each, before they come to court; such distribution would be irrevocable, and would even constitute a praiseworthy act. Since A is willing so to divide his possessions, no judge can force him to favor one creditor at the expense of the other creditors. However, before receiving his share of A's possessions, movables or immovables, each creditor will have to take a creditor's oath — the same oath that a creditor takes upon collecting his debt from encumbered property.
SOURCES: Cr. 219; Am II, 45; Tesh. Maim. to Mishpatim, 41.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Previous VerseFull ChapterNext Verse