The Oath of One Who Admits Part of a Claim

The father of Rabbi Apturiki taught: "I have a maneh [a hundred zuz] in your hand," and the other says "you have nothing of yours in my hand," and witnesses testify that he holds fifty — you might think he must swear concerning the rest. The verse states "for any lost thing of which one says, this is it" (Exodus 22:8): upon his own admission you impose an oath, but you do not impose an oath upon him through the testimony of witnesses. And Rabbi Chiyya is a Tanna and may disagree. But the verse states it! That verse he requires for an admission to part of the claim. And the father of Rabbi Apturiki would say to you: it is written "it (hu)" and it is written "this (zeh)" — one for admission to part, and one for admission of the same kind as the claim. And the other holds there is no requirement that the admission be of the same kind as the claim, holding like Rabban Gamliel; as we learned: if one claimed wheat from him and he admitted to barley, he is exempt, but Rabban Gamliel holds him liable. Rabbi Chiyya bar Abba said in the name of Rabbi Yochanan: one who falsely pleads that a thief took a deposit is not liable until he denies part and admits part, for the verse says "this is it." And this differs from Rabbi Chiyya bar Yosef, who said: there is a mixing of passages written here, and when "this is it" is written it is written concerning a loan. And why is a loan different? As Rabbah explained: why did the Torah say that one who admits to part of a claim must swear? There is a presumption that a person will not be brazen before his creditor. This one would have wished to deny it all, and the reason he admitted is that a person will not be brazen; and he would have wished to admit all of it, and the reason he denied part is that he reasoned, "if I admit all of it he will sue me at law; let me evade him for now until I have the means and repay him." Therefore the Merciful One imposes an oath upon him, so that he will admit the whole to him. Rami bar Chama taught: all four bailees require denial of part and admission of part. What is the reason? The unpaid bailee — it is written explicitly "this is it." The paid bailee — derives "giving, giving" from the unpaid bailee. The borrower — "and when one borrows," the conjunctive "and" adds to the earlier subject. The renter — if according to the one who says he is like an unpaid bailee, that is the unpaid bailee; and if according to the one who says he is like a paid bailee, that is the paid bailee.