Translate

Powered By Blogger

15.10.26

If a person has a deposit, and then losses it, he takes an oath, "It is not in my domain," (according to Rav Huna Bava Metzia page 34). In Tur Choshen Mishpath chapter 82 is brought that this oath is from the Torah according to Rashi, and by a decree by the sages of the Talmud, according to the Rambam. (This is the well known "oath of heset") [The Rambam writes this in Laws of Pleas chapter 1, law 3.] My question here is that the Gemara says a lender with a pledge owns the pledge. {from R Isaac} So, I wonder what happens if the lender denies that he has he pledge? Does he take the oath, “It is not in my domain?” And if he does, and it turns out that he lied, is he liable to bring a sacrifice? I mean, if he owns it, he can not be liable for robbery, but on the other hand, he did take a false oath. This question seems to depend on the issue if a borrower gives a pledge to a lender, if that is already considered to be "Here is payment for the loan". {If the lender already owns the pledge, then when he claims "it is not in my domain, he is lying, but he is not stealing it.} According to the Raavad (in laws of pleas chapter 4 law 6), the giving of the pledge is already considered as payment like R Isaac said: the lender owns the pledge.-------------------------------If a person has a deposit, and then losses it, he takes an oath, "It is not in my domain," (according to רב הונא בבא מציעא ל''ד). In טור חושן משפט פרק פ''ב is brought that this oath is from the Torah according to רש''י, and by a decree by the sages of the Talmud, according to the רמב''ם. (This is the well known "oath of היסת") [The רמב''ם writes this in הלכות טוען ונטען פרק א' הלכה ג'.] My question here is that the גמרא says a lender with a משכון owns the משכון. { זה from ר' יצחק} So, I wonder what happens if the lender denies that he has he pledge? Does he take the oath, “It is not in my domain?” And if he does, and it turns out that he lied, is he liable to bring a sacrifice? I mean, if he owns it, he can not be liable for robbery. But on the other hand, he did take a false oath. This question seems to depend on the issue if a borrower gives a משכון to a lender, if that is already considered to be "Here is payment for the loan".("הילך") {If the lender already owns the pledge, then when he claims "It is not in my domain, he is lying, but he is not stealing it.} According to the ראב''ד (in ה' טוען ונטען פרק ד' הלכה ו'), the giving of the pledge is already considered as payment like ר' יצחק said: the lender owns the pledge.