## Bava Kamma Daf 107a

###### Bava Kamma 107a:1
[Bava Kamma 107a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/107a:1)

עֵירוּב פָּרָשִׁיּוֹת כָּתוּב כָּאן, וְכִי כְּתִיב: ״כִּי הוּא זֶה״ – אַמִּלְוָה הוּא דִּכְתִיב. וּמַאי שְׁנָא מִלְוָה?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**A merging of** Torah **portions is written here,** and the *halakha* written in this passage is in fact meant to be applied to a different passage. **And when it is written: “This is it,”** from which the *halakha* of a partial admission is derived, **it is written concerning a loan,** not a deposit. The Gemara asks: **And what is different** about **a loan** that this *halakha* would apply only there?


###### Bava Kamma 107a:2
[Bava Kamma 107a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/107a:2)

כִּדְרַבָּה – דְּאָמַר רַבָּה, מִפְּנֵי מָה אָמְרָה תּוֹרָה: מוֹדֶה בְּמִקְצָת הַטַּעֲנָה יִשָּׁבַע? חֲזָקָה אֵין אָדָם מֵעִיז פָּנָיו בִּפְנֵי בַּעַל חוֹבוֹ; וְהַאי – בְּכוּלֵּי[הּ] בָּעֵי דְּנִכְפְּרֵיהּ, וְהַאי דְּלָא כַּפְרֵיהּ – מִשּׁוּם דְּאֵין אָדָם מֵעִיז פָּנָיו.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: It is **in accordance with** the statement **of Rabba, as Rabba says: For what** reason **did the Torah say** that one who **admits to a part of the claim must take an oath?** It is because there is **a presumption** that **a person does not exhibit insolence** by lying **in the presence of his creditor,** who had done him a favor by lending money to him. **And this** person who denies part of the claim actually **wants to deny all of** the debt, so as to be exempt, **and this** fact **that he does not deny** all of **it** is **because a person does not exhibit insolence.**


###### Bava Kamma 107a:3
[Bava Kamma 107a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/107a:3)

וּבְכוּלֵּי[הּ] בָּעֵי דְּלוֹדֵי לֵיהּ, וְהַאי דִּכְפַר לֵיהּ בְּמִקְצָת – סָבַר: אִי מוֹדֵינָא לֵיהּ בְּכוּלֵּיהּ – תָּבַע לִי בְּכוּלֵּיהּ; אֶישְׁתְּמֵיט לֵי[הּ] מִיהָא הַשְׁתָּא אַדְּהָווּ לִי זוּזֵי, וּפָרַעְנָא. הִלְכָּךְ רְמָא רַחֲמָנָא שְׁבוּעָה עִילָּוֵיהּ – כִּי הֵיכִי דְּלוֹדֵי לֵיהּ בְּכוּלֵּיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rabba continues: **And** in order not to exhibit insolence, he **wants to admit to** the creditor **with regard to all of** the debt, **and this** fact **that he denies** owing **him in part** is because he **reasons: If I admit to him with regard to all of** the debt, **he will lodge a claim against me with regard to all of it,** and right now I do not have the money to pay. **I will evade him at least** for **now until I have money, and** then **I will pay** him all of it. This rationalization enables one to falsely deny part of a claim. **Therefore, the Merciful One imposes an oath on him, in order** to ensure **that he will admit to him with regard to all of** the debt.


###### Bava Kamma 107a:4
[Bava Kamma 107a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/107a:4)

וְגַבֵּי מִלְוָה הוּא דְּאִיכָּא לְמֵימַר הָכִי, אֲבָל גַּבֵּי פִּקָּדוֹן – מֵעִיז וּמֵעִיז.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara completes its answer: **And it is with regard to a loan that this can be said,** as the basis for this explanation is that one will not exhibit insolence before his creditor, who did him a favor by lending him money; **but with regard to a deposit, one will certainly exhibit insolence,** as the claimant did him no favor. Therefore, there is no reason to say that one who completely denies a claim concerning a deposit is deemed credible any more than one who admitted to part of it, and he is obligated to take an oath in either case.


###### Bava Kamma 107a:5
[Bava Kamma 107a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/107a:5)

תָּנֵי רָמֵי בַּר חָמָא: אַרְבָּעָה שׁוֹמְרִין

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Rami bar Ḥama teaches** this *baraita*: All **four** types of **bailees**