More Discussions for this daf
1. Hoda'ah, Harsha'ah 2. Kohen Collecting Pidyon ha'Ben

Steven Friedell asked:

When two fathers claim a refund of the pidyon ha-ben from one kohen, and the kohen denies the first claim made by Reuven by saying that Reuven's son is alive and that Shimon's son has died as Rashi explains, why is that not in effect an admission that he owes Shimon the five selaim?

As for Shmuel's explanation that the one father provided the other with a harsha'a, would Rav have approved of this given his opposition in general to the use of harsha'a (Shevuot 31a)? Or was Rav limited in his opposition to situations where the murshe had no prior connection to the controversy.

Thank you.

Steven Friedell

The Kollel replies:

1. The claim to Reuven does not necessitate an explicit Hoda'ah to Shimon. It is enough that he says that it is a Safek and that Reuven must prove it because of ha'Motzi me'Chaveiro Alav ha'Re'ayah. However, any Hoda'ah made to someone who is not the Ba'al Din is not binding.

2. As Rashi points out there, Rav's opposition applies when it is not his controversy.

D. Zupnik