- המלוה את חבירו בעדים אינו צריך לפרעו בעדים
The Gemara continues to seek other cases that the Mishnah could have chosen where Rebbe Yehoshua concedes that הפה שאסור הוא הפה שהתיר works when no claim was initiated against the defendant. It suggests that the Tanna could have said that Rebbe Yehoshua agrees באומר לחבירו מנה לויתי ממך ופרעתיו לך שהוא נאמן – Where someone says to his friend, “I borrowed a maneh from you, and then repaid you,” that he is believed. The Gemara rejects this, for then in the seifa of the Mishnah he would have to teach, “But if there are witnesses that he borrowed from him, and the borrower claims he repaid him, he is not believed”. This is problematic because the halachah is המלוה את חבירו בעדים אינו צריך לפרעו בעדים – that if one borrows from someone in the presence of witnesses, the borrower is not required to repay him in the presence of witnesses. The defendant would therefore be believed when he said that he repaid the loan.
- מפני מה אמרה תורה מודה במקצת הטענה
Rabbah taught: מפני מה אמרה תורה מודה במקצת הטענה ישבע – Why did the Torah say that one who admits to part of a claim must swear that the denial of the other part is true? חזקה אין אדם מעיז פניו בפני בעל חובו – Because it is a chazakah that a person is not brazen enough to deny his obligation to the face of his lender. Therefore, it is possible that the debtor really wished to deny the entire loan, and the reason he did not deny it entirely is only because a person is not brazen enough to deny the entire loan to the face of his lender. Rabbah continues that it could be that the borrower wanted to admit the entire claim to the lender, and the reason he did not is in order that the lender will leave him alone, and he is thinking, “I will delay until I have the money and then I will repay him”. Therefore, רחמנא אמר רמי שבועה עליה כי היכי דלודי ליה בכוליה – the Torah says to impose a shevuah on the borrower so that he will admit to the entire claim.
- If witnesses claimed the signatures are theirs but they were forced with a financial threat
The next Mishnah states: העדים שאמרו כתב ידינו הוא זה – If witnesses come to certify a document and say: “This is our handwriting,” אבל אנוסים היינו קטנים היינו פסולי עדות היינו הרי אלו נאמנים – “but we were forced to sign,” or “we were minors when we signed,” or “we were unfit to testify,” they are believed. But if there are other witnesses that testify that it is their handwriting, or if their handwriting is verified from another document, they are not believed. Rami bar Chama made a statement, which the Gemara concludes applies to the reisha of the Mishnah when the witnesses are believed. He said: לא שנו אלא שאמרו אנוסין היינו מחמת נפשות This only applies when they were forced with a threat to their lives. אבל אמרו אנוסין היינו מחמת ממון אין נאמנין - But if they said they were forced with a threat to their finances, they are not believed, because אין אדם משים עצמו רשע – A person cannot establish himself as a rasha. Rashi explains that a witness cannot disqualify himself with a self-incriminating statement, because קרוב הוא אצל עצמו וקרוב פסול לעדות – a person is considered related to himself, and a person cannot testify about his relatives.