ב"ה
Channels Yeshiva Talmud for Beginners

Talmud Study - Lesson 11

Resolving Rav Huna's Oath (Part 1)

PDF
Autoplay Next

Talmud Study - Lesson 11: Resolving Rav Huna's Oath (Part 1)

Following the strong objection raised against Rav Huna's oath, the Talmud provides several resolutions in defense of Rav Huna.
Handouts:
 Lesson 11: Handout  
Lesson 11: Talmud Text  
Lesson 11: Talmud Text in English  
Related Text: Bava Metzia 35a
Audio: Listen to Audio | Download this MP3
Topics: Bava Metzia, Talmud
By Eliezer Wolf
More from   |  RSS
© Copyright, all rights reserved. If you enjoyed this article, we encourage you to distribute it further, provided that you comply with Chabad.org's copyright policy.

More in this section

You may also be interested in...
Quantum Talmud
How deep can Talmud go?
40 Comments
An Introduction to the Talmud
Listen (44:10) 1 Comment
Talmud Study - Lesson 1
An Introduction to Talmud
Watch (49:53) 273 Comments
What Is the Talmud?
The primary text of Oral Law
3 Comments

Join the Discussion

Sort By:
9 Comments
Posting Guidelines
Abraham Hope Manchester UK February 6, 2014

Wholesale or retail? So I bought the article wholesale, that was before I retired, bought it and it was a bargain. I would value it at the price it would cost me to replace now, ie the going rate, as I am now retired. But the lender might set the value at the cost price to him, he is in business and could buy at the wholesale price, so are not both of our of valuations correct? Reply

Laurie Julian Winnetka, CA/USA January 31, 2012

Thank you This class was so fascinating. The time went by so quickly I can't believe the class is over. I was just memorized. You seem so interested in this, your interest just carries the class along with you. I am sad that there are only 2 classes left in this course. Thank you so much. Reply

Kameo Eindhoven, The Netherlands June 7, 2011

Catching up "What if the lender took out the item just before the fire started"?or..." " and should the witnesses take an oath that they have seen what they said they have seen?"

It seems to me it is a continuing debate with all involved, where on earth you find something simular to this?

Again i am stunned by the love of people in judaic law and the individual gift of live, even ones life goes to hardships, it is better to live it to the fullest and make the best of it and love it, as a unique gift.

Looking forward to the last 2 lessons Reply

Eliezer Wolf NY July 7, 2010

To Anonymous You sound like someone I would do business with!

Of course all business dealings should be performed with written contractual arrangements, and witnesses etc.

But what if dealings were performed without all these methods of verification?

This is what the Talmud is addressing. Reply

Anonymous Garden City, Mich July 4, 2010

borrower & lender's oaths. in most cases these transactions between the borrower and lender even when collaterall is given is usually done in written form specifying values and repayments,of cousre without interest. The item held in collaterall might have increased in value but the re-payment is made on the value at the time the transaction took effect. Why the ruckus about oaths then? Why required Reply

Eliezer Wolf NY July 7, 2010

To Yisroel Excellent questions.

I think the answer to your first question is hinted in your second question.

We could suggest, that the Mishnah is referring to a case in which the item was stolen not through a break-in (for there are no signs of smashed windows, broken locks etc) but rather in a very 'peaceful' way. This can only have done by someone who gained lawful entry into the home.

Why the Mishnah would speak of such a specific and limited scenario? Well, I agree that this is a strong question. Incidentally, the Talmud does not remain with this answer, and offers some other answers.

Also, as we mentioned, the ruling in the Shulchan Aruch makes no mention of this answer, and instead chooses to rule like Rav Ashi, who offers a very sensible and plausible interpretation of the Mishnah. Reply

Yisroel Chicago, IL July 1, 2010

Lesson 11 The lender might not necessarily know who stole the item because someone might have broke into house and stole it. How can the Gemara make such a conclusion?

Also, how can the Gemara limit the applicability of the Mishna to a very specific case, where the theft was witnessed? How did Rava know this? Reply

Eliezer Wolf NY July 7, 2010

To Luther The reason why we explained Rashi first is because Rashi is normally the very first commentary one uses when studying the Talmud. His (usually) simple method of explaining the plain meaning of the text is most useful as a running commentary.

Only afterwards does one explore the more complex commentaries, such a Rabbeinu Chananel, Tosafos etc. Reply

luther nashman ny, ny/usa June 30, 2010

lesson 11 Why is Rashi listed first when explaining the guardian case before Rabbeinu Chananel when Rashi was born later (1040-1105 versus 990-1053)? Reply

Talmud for Beginners
These Talmud classes will be studying and analyzing the third chapter of tractate Bava Metzia, which presents the Jewish approach in many matters of civil law, particularly vis-à-vis the different degrees of liability assumed by guardians, renters and borrowers.
Related Topics