Bava Metzia 6 - Why Accept An Oath? (Finds)

Why does the litigant accept the oath of his opponent in lieu of payment? Doesn't he himself claim that his opponent is a thief, such as in the case of two people with a garment, and just as he claims that his opponent lied about money, he can suspect that his opponent will take a false oath?

That argument, however, is false. Some people will withdraw from taking a doubtful oath but will not withdraw from taking uncertain money. And what is the reason for this difference in attitude? Money taken improperly can be returned, but an oath, once uttered, cannot be recalled.

Art: The Payment of Dues by Georges de La Tour

Don't understand a point? Ask MosesAI about it.