Shevuot 86

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> אהייא אילימא אסיפא ותיפוק ליה דשבועה גבי מלוה

<big><b>GEMARA: </b></big>To what does it refer?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The statement of the Mishnah that the lender takes the oath.');">¹</span> Shall we say, to the last clause?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where the borrower claims a sela' from the lender, and the lender admits owing him a denar.');">²</span>

אמר שמואל ארישא וכן אמר רבי חייא בר רב ארישא וכן א"ר יוחנן ארישא

You may infer this [in any case], for the oath devolves upon the lender!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For he is the one who admits a portion of the claim.');">³</span> - Said Samuel: It refers to the first clause: and so said R'Hiyya B'Rab: It refers to the first clause; and so said R'Johanan: It refers to the first clause.

מאי רישא סיפא דרישא סלע הלויתיך עליו ושקל היה שוה והלה אומר לא כי אלא סלע הלויתני עליו ושלשה דינרין היה שוה חייב דשבועה גבי לוה היא ושקלוה רבנן מלוה ושדיוה אמלוה

- Which first clause? The lat part of the first clause: 'I LENT YOU A SELA' ON IT, AND IT WAS WORTH A SHEKEL,' AND THE OTHER SAYS: 'NO! YOU LENT ME A SELA' ON IT, AND IT WAS WORTH THREE DENARII,' HE IS LIABLE.

והשתא דאמר רב אשי דקיימא לן זה נשבע שאינה ברשותו וזה נשבע כמה שוה הכי קאמר מי נשבע תחלה מי שהפקדון אצלו שמא ישבע זה ויוציא הלה את הפקדון

For here the oath devolves upon the borrower, but the Rabbis removed it from the borrower, and imposed it upon the lender.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For the reason given in the MISHNAH:');">⁴</span> But now that R'Ashi has said that we have established that this one<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The lender.');">⁵</span>

אמר שמואל האי מאן דאוזפיה אלפא זוזי לחבריה ומשכן ליה קתא דמגלא אבד קתא דמגלא אבד אלפא זוזי אבל תרתי קתאתי לא

swears that it is not in his possession,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For he may not have lost the pledge, but may have become enamoured of it and desired to retain it; he therefore says that he lost it, and wishes to pay its value. Consequently, he must take an oath that it is really not in his possession.');">⁶</span> and the other one<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The borrower.');">⁷</span>

ורב נחמן אמר אפי' תרתי קתאתי אבד חדא אבד חמש מאה אבד אידך אבד כוליה אבל קתא ונסכא לא נהרדעי אמרי אפילו קתא ונסכא אבד נסכא אבד פלגא אבד קתא אבד כוליה

swears how much it was worth, he means thus: WHO TAKES THE OATH first?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the latter part of the first clause (where the oath devolves upon the borrower) to which this question of the Mishnah refers.');">⁸</span> HE WHO HAD THE DEPOSIT,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Takes the oath that it is not in his possession; he cannot now produce the deposit.');">⁹</span>

תנן סלע הלויתיך עליו ושקל היה שוה והלה אומר לא כי אלא סלע הלויתני עליו ושלשה דינרין היה שוה חייב לימא ליה הא קבילתיה

LEST, IF THE OTHER TAKE THE OATH [FIRST],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' About the value of the deposit.');">¹⁰</span> THIS ONE MAY BRING OUT THE DEPOSIT.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And show that the other had sworn falsely as to its value.');">¹¹</span>

מתניתין בדפריש שמואל בדלא פריש

Samuel said: If one lent a thousand zuz to his neighbour, who deposited with him as a pledge the handle of a saw;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which is worth much less than the loan.');">¹²</span> if the handle of the saw was lost, the thousand zuz are lost;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because the lender accepted it as sufficient security.');">¹³</span>

לימא כתנאי המלוה את חבירו על המשכון ואבד המשכון ישבע ויטול את מעותיו דברי רבי אליעזר רבי עקיבא אומר יכול הוא שיאמר לו כלום הלויתני אלא על המשכון אבד המשכון אבדו מעותיך

but in the case of two handles we do not say this.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That he accepted each handle as security for 500 zuz, and if he loses one handle, he loses 500 zuz. For he did not specifically say that he accepted each handle as security for half the loan. We therefore say that both handles together are the pledge for the loan, and if he loses one handle, as long as the other is left, he may restore it to the borrower; and he deducts from the loan merely the value of the lost handle, and not 500 zuz.');">¹⁴</span> But R'Nahman Says, even in the case of two handles, if he lost one, he loses five hundred [zuz], if he lost [also] the other, he loses the whole [loan]; but in the case of a handle and a bar [of silver] do not say this.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That he accepted the silver bar as security for half the loan, for since a silver bar is sufficiently valuable to be accepted as part payment, the lender accepted it as a pledge only up to its value,');">¹⁵</span>

אבל המלוה אלף זוז בשטר והניח משכון בידו דברי הכל אבד המשכון אבדו מעותיו

The Nehardeans say, even in the case of a handle and silver bar, if he lost the silver bar, h loses half [the loan], if he lost [also] the handle, he loses the whole [loan]. We learnt: 'I LENT YOU A SELA' ON IT, AND IT WAS WORTH A SHEKEL,' AND THE OTHER SAYS: 'NO! YOU LENT ME A SELA' ON IT, AND IT WAS WORTH THREE DENARII,' HE IS LIABLE.

היכי דמי אי דשוי שיעור זוזי

- [Now why? ] Let him say to him: 'But you accepted it [as security]'!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Why should the borrower have to take an oath? Let him say to the lender: 'You accepted the pledge as security for your loan, and since you have lost the pledge, you have lost your money!' Since the Mishnah does not say this, it conflicts with the view of Samuel!');">¹⁶</span> - Our Mishnah [refers to a case] where he stated explicitly;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That he accepts the pledge as security only up to its value.');">¹⁷</span> and Samuel [refers to a case] where he did not state this explicitly.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' But simply accepted the pledge; we assume therefore that he accepted it as full security for the whole amount of the loan; and if he loses the pledge, he loses the loan.');">¹⁸</span> Shall we say that Tannaim [disagree on this point]? [For it was taught:] If a man lends his neighbour [money] on a pledge, and the pledge was lost, he swears,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That he has lost it.');">¹⁹</span> and takes his money: this is the opinion of R'Eliezer. R'Akiba says: He may say to him: 'Did you not lend me because of the pledge? Since the pledge is lost, your money is lost.' But if one lends a thousand zuz on a bond, and he deposited a pledge with him, all agree that if the pledge is lost, the money is lost.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For since the lender has a document that the other owes him the money, what need is there for a pledge? Obviously, therefore, he took the pledge to secure himself, that if the borrower would not pay (or would have no means to pay) he would keep the pledge. The pledge was therefore not merely a reminder of the loan but a possible source of repayment (for, as a reminder of the loan, he had the bond) . If he loses the pledge, therefore, he loses the loan.');">²⁰</span> - Now, how is this? If the pledge is equal to the amount of the loan,