## Shevuot Daf 43b

###### Shevuot 43b:1
[Shevuot 43b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/43b:1)

**גְּמָ׳** אַהֵיָיא? אִילֵּימָא אַסֵּיפָא – וְתִיפּוֹק לֵיהּ דִּשְׁבוּעָה גַּבֵּי מַלְוֶה!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** **To which** case is the final statement in the mishna, which says the creditor is the one who takes the oath, referring? **If we say** it is referring **to** the case in **the latter clause** of the mishna, where the debtor claims that the collateral was worth more than the loan, **derive** this *halakha* from the fact **that** the **oath is** anyway taken **by the creditor,** as he is the defendant in this case. The additional statement is superfluous.


###### Shevuot 43b:2
[Shevuot 43b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/43b:2)

אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: אַרֵישָׁא. וְכֵן אָמַר רַבִּי חִיָּיא בַּר רַב: אַרֵישָׁא. וְכֵן אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: אַרֵישָׁא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
In response, **Shmuel says:** This statement relates **to** the case in **the first clause** of the mishna, where the debtor is the defendant. **And Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Rav similarly says** that it relates **to the first clause. And Rabbi Yoḥanan similarly says** that it relates **to the first clause.**


###### Shevuot 43b:3
[Shevuot 43b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/43b:3)

מַאי רֵישָׁא? סֵיפָא דְּרֵישָׁא: ״סֶלַע הִלְוִיתִיךָ עָלָיו וְשֶׁקֶל הָיָה שָׁוֶה״, וְהַלָּה אוֹמֵר: ״לֹא כִּי, אֶלָּא סֶלַע הִלְוִיתַנִי עָלָיו וּשְׁלֹשָׁה דִּינָרִין הָיָה שָׁוֶה״ – חַיָּיב. דִּשְׁבוּעָה גַּבֵּי לֹוֶה הִיא, וְשַׁקְלוּהָ רַבָּנַן מִלֹּוֶה וְשַׁדְיוּהָ אַמַּלְוֶה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What** did the *amora’im* mean by: **The first clause?** The Gemara answers: They were not referring to the very first *halakha* in the mishna, but rather to **the latter part of the first clause:** There is a case of a creditor who claims: **I lent you a *sela* on** the basis of that collateral **and it was worth a shekel. And the other** individual, the debtor, **says: That is not** the case; **rather, you lent me a *sela* on** the basis of that collateral **and** the collateral **was worth three dinars,** i.e., three-quarters of a *sela*. In this case, he is **liable** to take an oath. **As** in this case, **the oath** should in principle be taken **by the debtor,** since he is the one who admitted to a part of the creditor’s claim, **but the Sages removed** the obligation to take an oath **from the debtor and imposed it on the creditor,** deeming him liable to take an oath that the collateral was not worth more than a shekel.


###### Shevuot 43b:4
[Shevuot 43b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/43b:4)

וְהַשְׁתָּא דְּאָמַר רַב אָשֵׁי דְּקַיְימָא לַן זֶה נִשְׁבָּע שֶׁאֵינָהּ בִּרְשׁוּתוֹ וְזֶה נִשְׁבָּע כַּמָּה שָׁוֶה – הָכִי קָאָמַר: מִי נִשְׁבָּע תְּחִלָּה? מִי שֶׁהַפִּקָּדוֹן אֶצְלוֹ. שֶׁמָּא יִשָּׁבַע זֶה, וְיוֹצִיא הַלָּה אֶת הַפִּקָּדוֹן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara notes: **And now that Rav Ashi says that we maintain** that two oaths are taken in this case, as **this** party, the creditor, **takes an oath that** the collateral **is not in his possession, and that** party, the debtor, **takes an oath** concerning **how much** the collateral **was worth, this** is what the mishna **is saying: Who takes an oath first? The one in whose** possession **the deposit** had been located, i.e., the creditor, first takes an oath that the collateral is not in his possession, **lest this** party, the debtor, **take an oath and** then **the other** party, the creditor, **produce the deposit** and prove the oath false.


###### Shevuot 43b:5
[Shevuot 43b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/43b:5)

אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: הַאי מַאן דְּאוֹזְפֵיהּ אַלְפָּא זוּזֵי לְחַבְרֵיהּ, וּמַשְׁכֵּן לֵיהּ קַתָּא דְּמַגָּלָא; אֲבַד קַתָּא דְּמַגָּלָא – אֲבַד אַלְפָּא זוּזֵי. אֲבָל תַּרְתֵּי קַתָּאתֵי – לָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Shmuel says:** With regard to **one who lent one thousand dinars to another and took from him the handle of a sickle as collateral,** if **the handle of the sickle is lost,** the creditor has **lost the** entire sum of **one thousand dinars,** even though the lost collateral was worth less. **But** if he took **two handles** as collateral and only one of them was lost, the creditor does **not** lose the entire debt; he loses only the value of the handle that he lost.


###### Shevuot 43b:6
[Shevuot 43b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/43b:6)

וְרַב נַחְמָן אָמַר: אֲפִילּוּ תַּרְתֵּי קַתָּאתֵי: אֲבַד חֲדָא – אֲבַד חֲמֵשׁ מְאָה, אֲבַד אִידַּךְ – אֲבַד כּוּלֵּיהּ. אֲבָל קַתָּא וּנְסָכָא – לָא. נְהַרְדָּעֵי אָמְרִי: אֲפִילּוּ קַתָּא וּנְסָכָא: אֲבַד נְסָכָא – אֲבַד פַּלְגָא, אֲבַד קַתָּא – אֲבַד כּוּלֵּיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Rav Naḥman says: Even** if he took **two handles** and only **one** of them was **lost,** he has **lost five hundred** dinars, i.e., half the debt. If **the other** one was then also **lost,** he has **lost the entire** debt. **But** if he took **a handle and a piece of silver** as collateral and then lost the handle, he has **not** lost half the debt, as he presumably relied on the silver, not the handle, for payment. The Sages **of Neharde’a say: Even** if he took **a handle and a piece of silver,** and **the piece of silver was lost,** he has **lost half** the debt. If **the handle** was then **lost,** he has **lost the entire** debt.


###### Shevuot 43b:7
[Shevuot 43b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/43b:7)

תְּנַן: ״סֶלַע הִלְוִיתִיךָ עָלָיו וְשֶׁקֶל הָיָה שָׁוֶה״, וְהַלָּה אוֹמֵר: ״לֹא כִי, אֶלָּא סֶלַע הִלְוִיתַנִי עָלָיו וּשְׁלֹשָׁה דִּינָרִין הָיָה שָׁוֶה״ – חַיָּיב. לֵימָא לֵיהּ: ״הָא קַבֵּילְתֵּיהּ״!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges Shmuel’s opinion based on the mishna. **We learned** in the mishna: There is a case of a creditor who claims: **I lent you a *sela* on** the basis of that collateral **and it was worth a shekel. And the other** individual, the debtor, **says: That is not** the case; **rather, you lent me a *sela* on** the basis of that collateral **and** the collateral **was worth three dinars,** i.e., three-quarters of a *sela*. In this case, the debtor is **liable** to take an oath. According to Shmuel’s opinion that if the collateral is lost, the debt is canceled, **let** the debtor **say to him: You have** already **received** repayment of the debt by means of the collateral.


###### Shevuot 43b:8
[Shevuot 43b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/43b:8)

מַתְנִיתִין בִּדְפָרֵישׁ, שְׁמוּאֵל בִּדְלָא פָּרֵישׁ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: The *halakha* in **the mishna is with regard to** a case **where** the creditor **stated explicitly** that he is taking the collateral only to assure payment of the value of the item, and not as full repayment. Therefore, since there is a dispute with regard to the collateral’s monetary value, the two parties must litigate this matter. **Shmuel,** by contrast, was referring **to** a case **where** the creditor **did not state explicitly** whether he was taking the collateral to cover only its monetary value or the entire debt. In that case, it is presumed that he took it to cover the entire debt.


###### Shevuot 43b:9
[Shevuot 43b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/43b:9)

לֵימָא כְּתַנָּאֵי: הַמַּלְוֶה אֶת חֲבֵירוֹ עַל הַמַּשְׁכּוֹן וְאָבַד הַמַּשְׁכּוֹן – יִשָּׁבַע וְיִטּוֹל אֶת מְעוֹתָיו. דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר, יָכוֹל הוּא שֶׁיֹּאמַר לוֹ: כְּלוּם הִלְוִיתַנִי – אֶלָּא עַל הַמַּשְׁכּוֹן; אָבַד הַמַּשְׁכּוֹן, אָבְדוּ מְעוֹתֶיךָ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **Let us say** that Shmuel’s ruling is **the subject of** a dispute between ***tanna’im*,** as it is stated in a *baraita*: With regard to **one who lends** money **to another on** the basis of **collateral, and the collateral was lost, he must take an oath** that it was in fact lost **and** may then **take his money;** this is **the statement of Rabbi Eliezer. Rabbi Akiva says** that the debtor **can say to** the creditor: **Didn’t you lend me** the money **only on** the basis of **the collateral?** Since **the collateral was lost, your money is lost** as well.


###### Shevuot 43b:10
[Shevuot 43b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/43b:10)

אֲבָל הַמַּלְוֶה אֶלֶף זוּז בִּשְׁטָר, וְהִנִּיחַ מַשְׁכּוֹן בְּיָדוֹ – דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל: אָבַד הַמַּשְׁכּוֹן אָבְדוּ מְעוֹתָיו.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**But** with regard to **one who lends** another person **one thousand dinars with** a promissory **note, and** in addition to the note, the debtor **left collateral in** the creditor’s **possession, all agree** that since **the collateral was lost, his money is lost** as well. Since he had a promissory note as proof of the loan, the collateral was clearly taken as potential repayment.


###### Shevuot 43b:11
[Shevuot 43b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/43b:11)

הֵיכִי דָמֵי? אִי דְּשָׁוֵי שִׁיעוּר זוּזֵי –

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What are the circumstances** under which Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Akiva disagree? **If** it is a case **where** the collateral was **worth the amount of money** that he lent to him,