(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf

Shevuos 43


(a) We extrapolate from 'Eser Gefanim Te'unos Masarti Lach ... Rebbi Meir Mechayav' that Rebbi Meir holds 'Kol ha'Mechubar le'Karka Eino ke'Karka'.
What problem do we have with this?

(b) Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Chanina therefore, establishes our Mishnah by vines that are due to be harvested.
What is then the basis of the Machlokes between Rebbi Meir and the Rabbanan?

(a) How does Abaye attempt to qualify our Mishnah 'Ein Nishba'in Ela al Davar she'be'Midah ... '? In which case would there be a Chiyuv Shevu'ah, even though the claimant did not verbalize a specific amount?

(b) How does Rava refute Abaye's statement, based on the Seifa 'Zeh Omer ad ha'Ziz, ve'Zeh Omer ad ha'Chalon, Chayav'?

(c) What is Rava's conclusion?

(a) We cite a Beraisa in support of Rava.
What does the Tana say in a case where Reuven claims ...
  1. ... a Kur of produce and Shimon denies it?
  2. ... a large Menorah (or a large belt), and Shimon admits that he owes him a small one?
  3. ... a Menorah weighing ten Litrin, and Shimon admits that he owes him one weighing five?
(b) The Beraisa ends with the 'Klal' requiring a Davar she'be'Midah ... ' on the part of both the claimant and the debtor.
What does this come to exclude?

(c) What is the reason for the Tana's ruling (Patur) in the case of a large Menorah and a small one?

(d) How does Rav Shmuel bar Rav Yitzchak initially establish the case of a Menorah of ten and five Litrin where the Tana ruled Chayav?

(a) How do we refute Rav Shmuel bar Rav Yitzchak's explanation from the case of a large belt and a small one? What do we see from there?

(b) So how does Rebbi Aba bar Mamal finally explain the ruling of the Menorah of ten and five Litrin? Why is it considered 'mi'Miyn ha'Ta'anah'?

(a) What does our Mishnah rule in a case where the creditor loses the security he received against the loan and claims that the loan was a Sela, and the security was worth a Shekel (half a Sela), if the debtor counters that it was worth ...
  1. ... a Sela, and that he therefore owes him nothing?
  2. ... three Dinrim and he owes him only one Dinar?
(b) And what does the Tana say in a case where the debtor claims that the security was worth two Sela'im (in which case it is the creditor who owes him a Sela), and the creditor counters that it was worth only ...
  1. ... one, and that they are quits?
  2. ... five Dinrim and that he therefore owes him only one Dinar?
(c) On what basis does the Tana obligate the creditor (the guardian of the Pikadon) to swear how much the Pikadon was worth, and not the debtor (the Pikadon's owner)?
Answers to questions



(a) Shmuel concludes that when the Tana states 'Mi Nishba, Mi she'ha'Piladon Etzlo', he must be referring to the Reisha, where the creditor claims that the debt exceeded the value of the Pikadon (and Rebbi Chiya bar Ashi and Rebbi Yochanan concur with him).
Why can it not refer to the Seifa?

(b) To which of the two cases in the Reisha does it then refer?

(c) According to Rav Ashi, we do not switch the Shevu'ah at all, and it is the debtor who swears how much the Pikadon is worth.
How does he then interpret ...

  1. ... the question 'Mi Nishba'?
  2. ... the answer 'Mi she'ha'Pikadon Etzlo'?
(a) What does Shmuel say about Reuven who lends Shimon a thousand Zuz against a security of the handle of a scythe?

(b) Why is that?

(c) Does this mean that the debtor can turn round to the creditor and tell him to keep the handle as payment of the loan?

(a) Shmuel would not issue the same ruling in a case where Reuven received a security of two handles, and one of them got lost.
Why not?

(b) Rav Nachman disagrees.
What does he say?

(c) In which case, would he agree with Shmuel? Why is that?

(d) What do the Neherda'i say?

(a) What does our Mishnah rule in a case where Reuven loses the security that he received against a loan of a Sela, which he claims is worth a Shekel, if Shimon claims that it is worth three Dinrim?

(b) How do we reconcile this with Shmuel, who says 'Avad Kata de'Magla, Avad Kol Ma'osav'?

(c) Rebbi Eliezer rules in a Beraisa that if Reuven loses the security, he swears that he lost it, and claims his loan.
What does Rebbi Akiva say?

(d) In which case will Rebbi Eliezer agree that once Reuven loses the security, he loses his right to claim?

(a) Why can Rebbi Eliezer and Rebbi Akiva not be arguing over a security that is equal in value to the amount of the loan?

(b) In that case, they must be arguing when it is worth less (like the case of Shmuel). What do we initially suggest to be the basis of their Machlokes?

(c) According to Rebbi Eliezer, the creditor is no more than a Shomer over the security.
What kind of Shomer?

Answers to questions

Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,