Shevuos Chart #3
Chart for Shevuos Daf 42a-b
AGAINST WHICH CLAIMS IS A DEFENDANT OBLIGATED
TO SWEAR WITH A "SHEVU'AS MODEH B'MIKTZAS?"
| (A) REBBI ELIEZER BEN YAKOV |
(B) RABANAN |
||
| 1 | THE CLAIMANT DEMANDS PAYMENT FOR A DEBT OWED TO HIM (1) |
Chayav | Chayav |
| 2 | AN ADULT DEMANDS PAYMENT ON BEHALF OF A DEBT OWED TO HIS FATHER |
Chayav (2) | Patur (3) |
| 3 | A CHILD DEMANDS PAYMENT ON BEHALF OF A DEBT OWED TO HIS FATHER |
Chayav (2) | Patur (3) |
| 4 | A CHILD DEMANDS PAYMENT FOR A DEBT OWED TO HIM |
Patur (4) | Patur (4) |
| 5 | THE CLAIMANT IS UNSURE OF HIS CLAIM, OR THERE IS NO CLAIM ALTOGETHER | Patur (5) | Patur (5) |
==========
FOOTNOTES:
==========
(1) This is the ordinary case of "Modeh b'Miktzas."
(2) Rebbi Eliezer ben Yakov maintains that the assumption that a debtor is not so brazen as to deny a debt in its entirety directly in the face of the creditor applies also to denying the debt directly in the fact of the creditor's son, even a son who is a minor.
(3) The Rabanan maintain that a debtor will be so brazen as to deny a debt in its entirety directly in the face of the creditor's son, even a son who is an adult (so writes Rashi in Kesuvos 18b, DH Aval bi'Vno Me'iz). Therefore, if the debtor admits to part of the claim, he is considered to be one who is "Meshiv Aveidah" and is exempt from a Shevu'ah (alternatively, he is exempt because of a Migu that he could have denied the entire claim; see Tosfos to Kesuvos 18b, DH uv'Chulei).
(4) He is exempt because the verse says, "Ki Yiten Ish" (Shemos 22:6) -- only when an adult, an "Ish," gives money (as a loan or deposit) does that warrant the possibility of making a Shevu'ah, but not when a Katan, a minor, gives money. However, this only includes one who was a Katan at the time of the giving (Rashi).
(5) He is exempt from a Shevu'ah because he is merely doing an act of "Meshiv Aveidah," or because he has a Migu that he could have denied everything (see above, footnote #3).