Responsa for Bava Batra 54:14
תא שמע דתניא בית השלחין אבא שאול אומר כל האילן כנגד המשקולת מפני שהצל רע לבית השלחין שמע מינה ארישא קאי שמע מינה
<b><i>GEMARA</i></b>. The question was raised: Does Abba Saul's statement refer to the first clause in the Mishnah or the second?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., does he mean that the branches of wild fruit-bearing trees can be cut down plumb in any fields, or that in an irrigated field only the branches of such trees may be cut down plumb, but not of other trees? ');"><sup>13</sup></span>
Teshuvot Maharam
Q. A claims he has no cash and wants to repay his debt to B with goods. B demands that A swear that he has no cash. Is it not true that the court can not require an oath from A since no actual loss of money to B is involved?
A. The fact that there is no actual loss of money to B does not, of itself, absolve A from taking an oath. A is not required to take the oath for another reason. B can not claim to be certain that A has cash, and no one is required to take an oath when his opponent is not certain of his claim.
This Responsum is addressed to Rabbi Asher b. Moses.
SOURCES: Cr. 7, 8; Pr. 109; L. 360. Cf. Am II, 224.
A. The fact that there is no actual loss of money to B does not, of itself, absolve A from taking an oath. A is not required to take the oath for another reason. B can not claim to be certain that A has cash, and no one is required to take an oath when his opponent is not certain of his claim.
This Responsum is addressed to Rabbi Asher b. Moses.
SOURCES: Cr. 7, 8; Pr. 109; L. 360. Cf. Am II, 224.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy