If one lent his neighbor on a pledge, [the lender becomes a shomer sachar for it, whether or not the pledge were taken at the time of the loan. If the pledge were lost or stolen, and it were as much as the (amount of) the debt, the (loss of) the pledge cancels the debt and neither has a claim against the other. If the debt were more than the pledge, the borrower pays the lender the difference. If the pledge were more than the debt, the lender pays the borrower. And if it were lost by accident, in which instance a shomer sachar is not liable, the lender, too, is not liable. He swears that it was lost by accident and collects the entire debt.] — If the pledge were lost: If he said: "I lent you a sela for it, and it (the pledge) was worth a shekel [half a sela]," and the other said: "No, you lent me a sela and it was worth a sela," he is exempt (from an oath). (If one said:) "I lent you a sela for it, and it was worth a shekel," and the other said: "No, you lent me a sela for it and it was worth three dinars," he is liable. [For he admits part of the claim, a sela being four dinars.] (If one said:) "You lent me a sela for it, and it was worth two (selaim)," and the other said: "No, I lent you a sela for it, and it was worth a sela," he is exempt. (If one said:) "You lent me a sela for it, and it was worth two," and the other said: "No, I lent you a sela for it, and it was worth five dinars," he is liable. And who swears [first]? The one who held the pledge. [i.e., The lender, who held the pledge, swears that he no longer has it], lest this one (the borrower) swear, and the other (the lender) produce the pledge. [Since the borrower must swear how much his pledge was worth, and the lender must swear that he does not have the pledge, even if he pays for it, (for we are afraid that he might have "cast his gaze upon it"), beth-din beswear the lender first that he does not have it, and then they beswear the borrower as to its worth, lest the borrower swear first without being particular about its true worth, and the lender then produce the pledge and disqualify him for testimony and oath.]
Bartenura on Mishnah Shevuot
רבי מאיר אומר יש דברים שהם כקרקע – grapes that are about to be cut down is what distinguishes between the Sages and Rabbi Meir, for Rabbi Meir holds that gapes that are about to be cut are considered as [already] cut/harvested, but the Sages hold that they are not like they are cut/harvested. But the Halakha is according to the Sages. And especially in the law [relating to] the bailees, but regarding buying and selling, and overcharging and admitting to part of the claim, , in all of these, we hold that something about to be cut/harvested is like it was cut already, and such is the Halakha.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Shevuot
Introduction
Mishnah six continues to discuss land, which as we learned in the previous section, is not subject to the laws of oaths. Finally, in the last section of the mishnah, after several mishnayoth in which we learned when oaths are not taken, the mishnah states when oaths are taken.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Shevuot
עד הזיז (an attachment, a projection from the door frame serving as a shed over the entrance) – beam of a upper story that projects from the house, and the general principle of the matter, is that he is always not liable for an oath according to the Torah until he makes a claim against him with something specifying a concrete measure, or a weight or a measure, and he admits to him part of his measure or part of the weight or part of the number.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Shevuot
Rabbi Meir says: “There are things which are [attached] to land, but are not like land.” But the sages do not agree with him. How so? [If one says,] “Ten vines laden with fruit I delivered to you” and the other says, “There were only five”; Rabbi Meir makes him take an oath; But the Sages say: “All that is attached to land is like land.” After we stated in the previous mishnah that oaths are not imposed on claims of land, our mishnah discusses the status of things attached to the land, such as grapevines. According to Rabbi Meir grapevines are like land, and if a person admits to owing part of a claim of grapevines, he is exempt from swearing. The Sages say that grapevines are independent of land, and therefore one swears on them.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Shevuot
An oath is imposed only for a thing [defined] by size, weight, or number. How so? [If one says,] “A store room full [of produce] I delivered to you,” or “A purse full [of money] I delivered to you” – and the other says, “I do not know; but what you left you may take,” he is exempt. If one says, “[I gave you produce reaching] up to the moulding [above the window],” and the other says, “Only up to the window,” he is liable. In order for an oath to be imposed in defense of a claim, what was claimed and what was admitted must be measurable, by size, weight or number. In the first scenario in our mishnah, Shimon responds to Reuven that he doesn’t know how much Reuven gave him, but that Reuven can take whatever is left. Shimon’s admission was not phrased as a measurable amount. Therefore he does not have to take an oath regarding that which he denied. The second scenario is a case where the claim and admission were measurable amounts. Reuven claims that the house full of produce that he left for Shimon was full up to the top moulding over the window. Shimon admits that the store room was full only up to the window. Although it may seem that this is not a claim nor an admission of a measurable amount, the mishnah rules that it is, and Shimon must swear to Reuven.
