Talmud Yerushalmi
Yerushalmi Bava Kamma 10:7 ירושלמי בבא קמא י׳:ז׳
Part of: Chapter 10
Reading: Hebrew · Simple EnglishHebrew · Faithful translationHebrew onlyHebrew · Simple EnglishHebrew · Faithful translationHebrew onlySimple English onlyFaithful translation onlySide by side
משנה: הָאוֹמֵר לַחֲבֵירוֹ גְּזַלְתִּיךָ וְהִלְוִיתַנִי הִפְקַדְתָּ אֶצְלִי וְאֵינוֹ יוֹדֵעַ אִם הֶחֱזַרְתִּי לָךְ וְאִם לֹא הֶחֱזַרְתִּי לָךְ חַיָיב לְשַׁלֵּם. אֲבָל אָמַר לוֹ אֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ אִם גְּזַלְתִּיךָ אִם הִלְוִיתַנִי אִם הִפְקַדְתָּה אֶצְלִי אִם לֹא הִפְקַדְתָּ פָּטוּר מִלְּשַׁלֵּם.
MISHNAH: He who says to another: I robbed you, or I took a loan from you, you deposited with me, but I do not known whether I returned it to you or did not return it, is liable to pay. But if he said to him: I do not know whether I robbed you, or I took a loan from you, or you deposited with me or did not deposit, he is not liable to pay.
MISHNAH: He who says to another: I robbed you, or I took a loan from you, you deposited with me, but I do not known whether I returned it to you or did not return it, is liable to pay. But if he said to him: I do not know whether I robbed you, or I took a loan from you, or you deposited with me or did not deposit, he is not liable to pay.
הלכה: הָאוֹמֵר לַחֲבֵירוֹ גְּזַלְתִּיךָ כול׳. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר. בְּבָא לָצֵאת יְדֵי שָׁמַיִם. גְּזַלְתִּיךָ וְהִלְוִיתַנִי הִפְקַדְתָּה אֶצְלִי וְהֶחֱזַרְתִּי לָךְ. וַהֲלָהּ אוֹמֵר. אֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ. רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה סְבַר מֵימַר. חַיָיב לְהַעֲמִיד לוֹ מִן הַדִּין. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי סְבַר מֵימַר. עוֹד הִיא לָצֵאת יְדֵי שָׁמַיִם. הוֹצֵאתִי מִן הַכִּיס וְנָתַתִּי לָךְ. וְהוּא אוֹמֵר. אֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ. רַב הוּנָא אָמַר. אוֹמְרִין לוֹ. אַתְּ לֵית יְדַע אָהֵן יְדַע.
HALAKHAH: “He who says to another: I robbed you,” etc. Rebbi Joḥanan said, if he wants to clear himself before Heaven70Without a definitive claim from the other party, there is no case for the courts. “Liable” and “not liable” in this Mishnah refer to moral, not legal, obligations. Babli 118a.. I robbed you, or I took a loan from you, you deposited with me; did I return it to you? The other party says, I do not know71This seems to be a reformulation of the Mishnah; in that case R. Jeremiah would disagree with R. Joḥanan. Sabbatai Cohen (Šakh, Ḥošen Mišpaṭ §95 Note 67) reads “You robbed me, etc. I did return it to you, but the other party says, I do not know.”. Rebbi Jeremiah wanted to say, he is required to make good as a matter of law. Rebbi Yose wanted to say, still it is to become clear before Heaven. I took from the wallet and gave to you, and the other party says, I do not know. Rav Huna said, one tells him: You do not know but the other party knows72Cf. Šebuot 6, end (37b l. 64). There are two possible interpretations.
Šakh: They both agree that something was paid but neither party checked whether the exact amount was given. There is no claim, neither legal nor moral.
Pene Moshe: One party asserts that the debt was liquidated; the other party is not sure. Neither one has proof. Rav Huna asserts in the Babli 118a (also Ketubot 12b) that “between ‘certain’ and ‘possible’ claims, the ‘certain’ claim is preferred [by the courts]”..
HALAKHAH: “He who says to another: I robbed you,” etc. Rebbi Joḥanan said, if he wants to clear himself before Heaven70Without a definitive claim from the other party, there is no case for the courts. “Liable” and “not liable” in this Mishnah refer to moral, not legal, obligations. Babli 118a.. I robbed you, or I took a loan from you, you deposited with me; did I return it to you? The other party says, I do not know71This seems to be a reformulation of the Mishnah; in that case R. Jeremiah would disagree with R. Joḥanan. Sabbatai Cohen (Šakh, Ḥošen Mišpaṭ §95 Note 67) reads “You robbed me, etc. I did return it to you, but the other party says, I do not know.”. Rebbi Jeremiah wanted to say, he is required to make good as a matter of law. Rebbi Yose wanted to say, still it is to become clear before Heaven. I took from the wallet and gave to you, and the other party says, I do not know. Rav Huna said, one tells him: You do not know but the other party knows72Cf. Šebuot 6, end (37b l. 64). There are two possible interpretations.
Šakh: They both agree that something was paid but neither party checked whether the exact amount was given. There is no claim, neither legal nor moral.
Pene Moshe: One party asserts that the debt was liquidated; the other party is not sure. Neither one has proof. Rav Huna asserts in the Babli 118a (also Ketubot 12b) that “between ‘certain’ and ‘possible’ claims, the ‘certain’ claim is preferred [by the courts]”..