A man borrowed a cow for half a day and rented it for the other half a day, and the cow died. The lender claims, "It died while being borrowed," asking the borrower to be liable, but the borrower says, "I do not know." In this case, the borrower is liable.
Can we disprove it from Rav Nachman's ruling? If one claims to another, "You owe me a maneh (100 zuz), and the other one says, "I do not know if I owe you"" the defendant is NOT liable. But in the first ruling, he is!
Rav Nachman will answer that the first ruling is talking about two cows, and about one of them, the borrower agrees to his liability. This makes it a case of the borrower admitting in part, so that he has to swear, but not knowing about the second claim, he can't swear and thus has to pay.
Art: The Cowshed by Carl Larsson
No comments:
Post a Comment