Study Shevuot folio 40A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
The Talmud discusses the basis for Rav’s explanation. Know that the Mishnah is referring to claims of monetary value, as it teaches in the latter clause that if the claimant said: I have a gold dinar in your possession, and the defendant responded: You have only a silver dinar, or a tereisit, or a
The Talmud rejects this proof: R' Elazar says: This Mishnah is referring to a case where one claimed that the defendant owes him a dinar of coins, i.e., coins worth a dinar. The claim was for specific coins, and not a monetary value. Since the claim concerned coins and not a specific weight of met
The Talmud asks: And how would Rav, who holds that the claim in this case was for the value of a dinar, explain the fact that the Mishnah states: As they are all of one type; they are all coins? Why does it matter that they are all of one type? The Talmud answers that according to Rav, the reason t
The Talmud asks: And concerning the opinion of R' Elazar, shall we say that since he explains the latter clause in the Mishnah as referring to a specific item and not a value, in accordance with the opinion of Shmuel, then also with regard to the former clause, that states the claim must be for tw
The Talmud rejects this suggestion: No, R' Elazar explains that the latter clause of the Mishnah is referring specifically to actual items in accordance with the opinion of Shmuel, as it teaches explicitly: As they are all of one type; they are all coins. But the former clause can be interpreted e