One evening, Mr. Morris’s acquaintance, Mr. Roth, knocked at his door, asking to have a word with him.
“Certainly; come in,” Mr. Morris said, welcoming him inside.
“Perhaps you’ve forgotten,” Mr. Roth began, “but last year I lent you $500, which you never repaid.”
Mr. Morris scratched his head and thought for a moment.
“I never borrowed from you,” he replied.
“You definitely did,” Mr. Roth insisted. “And didn’t repay.”
“Do you have any written evidence?” asked Mr. Morris.
“No, I don’t,” acknowledged Mr. Roth.
“That just proves that I never borrowed your money,” said Mr. Morris.
Two weeks later, Mr. Morris was summoned to Rabbi Dayan’s beis din.
“I lent Mr. Morris $500 a year ago, which he hasn’t repaid,” claimed Mr. Roth.
“What do you say?” Rabbi Dayan asked Mr. Morris.
“I never borrowed from Mr. Roth,” responded Mr. Morris.
Rabbi Dayan asked Mr. Roth, “Do you have any evidence?”
“I have two witnesses to the loan,” replied Mr. Roth.
Rabbi Dayan called upon the witnesses to present their testimony. Each testified that Mr. Roth had lent Mr. Morris $500 in their presence.
Rabbi Dayan turned to Mr. Morris. “Witnesses have attested to the loan,” he said. “Do you have anything further to say?”
“I would like a month to seek counterevidence,” he requested. Rabbi Dayan consented to delay the final verdict for a month.
At the second hearing, Rabbi Dayan asked Mr. Morris if he had found any evidence to counter the original testimony.
“Yes, I also have witnesses,” replied Mr. Morris. The witnesses testified that Mr. Morris had repaid the $500 loan to Mr. Roth four months earlier.
“See, I don’t owe Mr. Roth any money,” Mr. Morris said. “Even if I borrowed, I paid back what I borrowed.” He sat down with a triumphant smile.
Rabbi Dayan requested that Mr. Roth and Mr. Morris exit for a few moments while the dayanim convened. The two were called in shortly for the ruling.
“Mr. Morris is liable and must pay the $500,” ruled Rabbi Dayan.
“What?” asked Mr. Morris, shocked. “But witnesses stated that I already repaid!”
“There is an important, well-known concept: Hodaas baal hadin k’meah eidim dami - The admission of a litigant is like the testimony of a hundred witnesses,” explained Rabbi Dayan. “In fact, his admission that he owes is believed - to his detriment - more than witnesses who exempt him!”
“But I didn’t admit anything,” said Mr. Morris. “I deny the charge completely!”
“You initially claimed in court, though, that you never borrowed the money,” said Rabbi Dayan. “A person who never borrowed doesn’t pay! Thus, implicit in your denial claim was an admission that you didn’t repay. This is expressed in the Gemara (B.B. 6a) as: Kol ha’omer lo lavisi k’omer lo parati dami - Whoever says, ‘I didn’t borrow,’ it is as if he is saying, ‘I didn’t repay.’”
“But since there are witnesses to the case,” reasoned Mr. Morris, “shouldn’t we follow them?”
“There are two parts to this case,” replied Rabbi Dayan. “One, whether you borrowed; two, whether you repaid. In regard to the loan, obviously we accept the witnesses’ testimony that you borrowed. However, regarding repayment, we accept your implicit admission [that you never paid] - even against the testimony of the witnesses! Thus, we believe the witnesses that you borrowed, but we believe your implicit admission that you did not repay (79:1,6).”
“But people initially deny outright all kinds of claims, and then come to beis din and adjust their claim and bring witnesses,” insisted Mr. Morris. “Are these witnesses all rendered meaningless?”
“If the initial claim denying the loan was stated informally, not in beis din, or if the borrower changed his claim before the lender brought witnesses,” answered Rabbi Dayan, “he is not considered a proven liar and can say that he already repaid (79:9). You, however, maintained your claim of having never borrowed until after Mr. Roth’s witnesses came.”