Talmud sobre Ketubot 13:4

הַטּוֹעֵן אֶת חֲבֵרוֹ כַדֵּי שֶׁמֶן, וְהוֹדָה בַקַּנְקַנִּים, אַדְמוֹן אוֹמֵר, הוֹאִיל וְהוֹדָה בְמִקְצָת הַטַּעֲנָה, יִשָּׁבֵעַ. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, אֵין זוֹ הוֹדָאָה מִמִּין הַטַּעֲנָה. אָמַר רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, רוֹאֶה אֲנִי אֶת דִּבְרֵי אַדְמוֹן:

Si uno le dice a su amigo jarras de aceite, y él admite [vacías] jarras, [sin aceite, como cuando su amigo dice: "Me debes diez jarras de aceite"], Admon dice: Dado que admite parte de la reclamar, él jura. [El reclamo connota petróleo y jarras, por lo que su admisión a las jarras vacías constituye una admisión parcial, lo que implica un juramento. ] Y los sabios dicen: Esto no constituye una admisión similar a la naturaleza del reclamo. [El reclamo connota petróleo solo en la cantidad de diez lanzadores, de modo que cuando admite que vacía los lanzadores, "lo que se reclama no se admite y lo que se admite no se reclama", de modo que no hay admisión similar a la naturaleza del reclamar, y no se implica un juramento. ] R. Gamliel dice: Me suscribo a las palabras de Admon. [La halajá está de acuerdo con Admon.]

Jerusalem Talmud Shevuot

MISHNAH: “You are holding for me a kor⁶⁴Biblical and Accadic measure of volume, 30 seah. of grain;” “I am holding for you only a letek⁶⁵A biblical measure of volume, half a kor. of legumes;” he is not liable. “You are holding for me a kor of produce;” “I am holding for you only a letek of legumes;” he is liable since legumes are subsumed under produce. If one sued for wheat and the other acknowledged barley, he is not liable, but Rebbi Simeon⁶⁶In all other sources, including the following Halakhah: Rabban Gamliel. He considers all grain to be of related kind. declares him liable. Somebody who sued for amphoras of oil and the other admitted to pitchers, Admon says since he admitted of the kind of the claim he has to swear. But the Sages say, the admission is not of the kind of the claim⁶⁷Admon (an authority of pre-rabbinic times) holds that the content of the vessels is determining; the Sages give preference to the determination of the vessels of storage.. Rabban Gamliel said, I see⁶⁸To see = to accept as obvious. the words of Admon.
If somebody sued for both vessels and real estate; if [the other] admitted the vessels but denied the real estate, or the real estate and denied the vessels, he is not liable⁶⁹One does not swear on claims of real estate (Mishnah 1). Therefore if the defendant acknowledged his debt of vessels, there is nothing left to take the oath. If he disputes all claims to vessels, there is no acknowledgment since admission of the duty to hand over real estate does not count.. If he admitted part of the real estate he is not liable⁶⁹One does not swear on claims of real estate (Mishnah 1). Therefore if the defendant acknowledged his debt of vessels, there is nothing left to take the oath. If he disputes all claims to vessels, there is no acknowledgment since admission of the duty to hand over real estate does not count.. Part of the vessels he is liable since non-guaranteed property obligates guaranteed property to be sworn about⁷⁰Mishnah Qiddušin1:5, Note 474. If the defendant is liable to take an oath, the claimant can add to the oath all of his outstanding claims even if they in themselves would not force an oath. This is known as “rolling over of oaths.”
A property is guaranteed if the seller as a matter of routine must guarantee the title to the property; this is the case with real estate..

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Versículo anterior Capítulo completo Versículo siguiente