Halacha

הלכה א
הַטוֹעֵן אֶת חֲבֵרוֹ בְּמִטַּלְטְלִין וְהוֹדָה לוֹ בְּמִקְצָת הֲרֵי זֶה מְשַׁלֵּם מַה שֶּׁהוֹדָה בּוֹ וְנִשְׁבָּע עַל הַשְּׁאָר מִן הַתּוֹרָה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמות כב ח) "אֲשֶׁר יֹאמַר כִּי הוּא זֶה". וְכֵן אִם כָּפַר בַּכּל וְאוֹמֵר לֹא הָיוּ דְּבָרִים מֵעוֹלָם וְעֵד אֶחָד מֵעִיד [שֶׁהוּא חַיָּב לוֹ] הֲרֵי זֶה נִשְׁבָּע מִן הַתּוֹרָה. ומִפִּי הַשְּׁמוּעָה לָמְדוּ שֶׁכָּל מָקוֹם שֶׁשְּׁנַיִם מְחַיְּבִין אוֹתוֹ מָמוֹן אֶחָד מְחַיְּבוֹ שְׁבוּעָה. וְכֵן לָמְדוּ מִפִּי הַשְּׁמוּעָה שֶׁעֵד אֶחָד לְכָל עָוֹן וּלְכָל חַטָּאת אֵינוֹ קָם אֲבָל קָם הוּא לִשְׁבוּעָה:
כסף משנה
1.
When a person who issues a claim against a colleague with regard to movable property, and the defendant acknowledges a portion of the claim, he must pay what he acknowledged, and take an oath with regard to the remainder. This is a Scriptural obligation, as Exodus 22:8 states: "That this is it."
Similarly, if the defendant denies the entire obligation and says: "Such a thing never happened," and one witness testifies that the defendant is obligated to the plaintiff, the defendant is obligated by Scriptural Law to take an oath. The Oral Tradition teaches: Whenever two witnesses would obligate the person to pay money, one witness obligates him to take an oath.
Similarly, it was derived through the Oral Tradition that one witness shall not rise up against any man for any iniquity or any sin. He may, however, rise up against him to obligate him to take an oath.

הלכה ב
אֵין לְךָ מְחֻיָּב שְׁבוּעָה מִן הַתּוֹרָה חוּץ מִשְּׁלֹשָׁה. מִי שֶׁהוֹדָה בְּמִקְצָת הַמִּטַּלְטְלִין. וּמִי שֶׁחִיְּבוֹ עֵד אֶחָד. וְהַשּׁוֹמֵר. שֶׁהֲרֵי נֶאֱמַר בְּשׁוֹמֵר (שמות כב י) "שְׁבֻעַת ה' תִּהְיֶה בֵּין שְׁנֵיהֶם". וּכְבָר בֵּאַרְנוּ שְׁבוּעַת הַשּׁוֹמְרִין בְּהִלְכוֹת שְׂכִירוּת. וְכָל אֶחָד מִן הַשְּׁלֹשָׁה נִשְׁבָּע וְנִפְטָר מִלְּשַׁלֵּם. אֲבָל כָּל הַנִּשְׁבָּעִין וְנוֹטְלִין כְּגוֹן שָׂכִיר וְנֶחְבָּל וּפוֹגֵם אֶת שְׁטָרוֹ וְכַיּוֹצֵא בּוֹ. וְכֵן כָּל הַנִּשְׁבָּעִין בְּטַעֲנַת סָפֵק כְּגוֹן הַשֻּׁתָּפִין וְהָאֲרִיסִין. כֻּלָּן נִשְׁבָּעִין בְּתַקָּנַת חֲכָמִים. וְכָל אֵלּוּ הַשְּׁבוּעוֹת אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהֵן מִדִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים הֲרֵי הֵן כְּעֵין שֶׁל תּוֹרָה בִּנְקִיטַת חֵפֶץ:
כסף משנה
2.
There are only three individuals who are obligated by Scriptural Law to take an oath: a person who denied a portion of a claim of movable property, a person obligated by one witness, and a watchman. For with regard to a watchman, Exodus 22:10 states: "The oath of God shall be between them." We have already explained the oath required of watchman in Hilchot Sechirut.
Each of these three individuals takes an oath and becomes free of his obligation to pay. In contrast, those who take an oath and collect the money they claim, e.g., an employee, a person who was injured, a person who impairs the legal power of his promissory note and the like, and similarly, those who take an oath because there is a possibility of a claim being lodged against them, e.g., partners and sharecroppers, all take oaths because of our Sages' ordinances. Although all these oaths were ordained by Rabbinic decree, they all resemble a Scriptural oath, and all must be taken while holding a sacred article.

הלכה ג
הַטּוֹעֵן מִטַּלְטְלִין עַל חֲבֵרוֹ וְכָפַר בַּכּל וְאָמַר לֹא הָיוּ דְּבָרִים מֵעוֹלָם. אוֹ שֶׁהוֹדָה בְּמִקְצָת וּנְתָנוֹ מִיָּד וְאָמַר אֵין לְךָ בְּיָדִי אֶלָּא זֶה וְהֵילָךְ. אוֹ שֶׁאָמַר אֱמֶת שֶׁהָיָה לְךָ אֶצְלִי אֲבָל מָחַלְתָּ לִי אוֹ נָתַתָּ לִי אוֹ מָכַרְתָּ לִי אוֹ הֶחְזַרְתִּי לְךָ. אוֹ שֶׁטְּעָנוֹ חִטִּים וְהוֹדָה לוֹ בִּשְׂעוֹרִים. בְּכָל אֵלּוּ פָּטוּר מִשְּׁבוּעַת הַתּוֹרָה. אֲבָל חַכְמֵי הַגְּמָרָא תִּקְּנוּ שֶׁיִּשָּׁבַע הַנִּתְבָּע בְּכָל אֵלּוּ שְׁבוּעַת הֶסֵּת וְיִפָּטֵר. וְאֵינוֹ כְּעֵין שֶׁל תּוֹרָה לְפִי שֶׁאֵין בָּהֶן נְקִיטַת חֵפֶץ. וּכְבָר בֵּאַרְנוּ דֶּרֶךְ שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁל תּוֹרָה וְדֶרֶךְ שְׁבוּעַת הֶסֵּת בְּהִלְכוֹת שְׁבוּעוֹת:
כסף משנה
3.
A defendant is not liable to take a Scriptural oath when a colleague claims that he owes movable property and the defendant:
a) denies the entire matter, saying: "Such a thing never occurred";
b) admitted a portion of the claim and gave it to him immediately, saying: "This is all I owe you; here it is";
c) admits that he had originally owed the plaintiff the debt, but claims that the plaintiff waived payment, gave him the object claimed as a present, or that he already returned the debt;
d) admits owing barley, while the plaintiff claims wheat.
Nevertheless, the Sages of the Gemara ordained that in all these situations, the defendant should take a sh'vuat heset, before being freed of liability. This oath does not resemble a Scriptural oath, because one need not hold a sacred article while taking it. We have already described the process of taking a Scriptural oath and that of taking a sh'vuat heset in Hilchot Sh'vuos.

הלכה ד
כָּל מִי שֶׁנִּתְחַיֵּב שְׁבוּעָה מִן הַתּוֹרָה הֲרֵי זֶה נִשְׁבָּע וְנִפְטָר. וְאִם לֹא רָצָה לְהִשָּׁבַע יוֹרְדִין לִנְכָסָיו וְגוֹבִין מֵהֶם כָּל מַה שֶּׁתָּבַע חֲבֵרוֹ עָלָיו. שֶׁהֲרֵי הַתּוֹבֵעַ אוֹמֵר לוֹ אֵינִי זָז מִדִּין תּוֹרָה אוֹ הִשָּׁבַע אוֹ תֵּן לִי. וְיֵשׁ לוֹ לְהַחֲרִים עַל מִי שֶׁטָּעַן עָלָיו דָּבָר שֶׁאֵינוֹ כֵּן וְנוֹתֵן. אֲבָל מִי שֶׁנִּתְחַיֵּב שְׁבוּעָה מִדִּבְרֵיהֶן אִם הָיָה מִן הַנִּשְׁבָּעִין וְנוֹטְלִין אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְהַפֵּךְ אֶת הַשְּׁבוּעָה שֶׁהֲרֵי הַנִּתְבָּע אוֹמֵר לוֹ הִשָּׁבַע וְטל כְּמוֹ שֶׁתִּקְּנוּ לְךָ. וְאִם לֹא רָצָה לְהִשָּׁבַע יֵלֵךְ לוֹ. וְהוֹרוּ רַבּוֹתַי שֶׁאִם אָמַר הַתּוֹבֵעַ אֵינִי רוֹצֶה בְּתַקָּנָה זוֹ שֶׁתִּקְּנוּ לִי חֲכָמִים אֶלָּא הֲרֵינִי כִּשְׁאָר הַתּוֹבְעִים הֲרֵי זֶה מַשְׁבִּיעַ אֶת הַנִּתְבָּע הֶסֵּת. וְאִם רָצָה לְהָפְכָהּ עַל הַתּוֹבֵעַ מְחַיְּבִין אֶת הַתּוֹבֵעַ לְהִשָּׁבַע אוֹ יֵלֵךְ לוֹ:
כסף משנה
4.
Whenever anyone is required to take an oath by Scriptural Law, he may take the oath and free himself of obligations. If he does not desire to take the oath, we attach his property and expropriate everything the plaintiff claims. For the plaintiff will say: "I will not budge from the Torah's ruling. Either take the oath or pay me." He may, however, have a conditional ban of ostracism issued against anyone who makes a false claim. He must then pay.
Different laws apply when, by contrast, a person is obligated to take an oath by Rabbinic degree. If he was one of those who must take an oath and collect his due, he cannot reverse the oath and require the defendant to take it. For the defendant will tell him: "Take the oath and collect as the Sages ordained for you." If he does not desire to take an oath, he should depart.
My masters ruled that if the plaintiff says: "I do not desire the ordinance which the Sages ordained on my behalf. Instead, I am no different than any other plaintiff," he may require the defendant to take a sh'vuat heset. If the defendant desires to reverse this oath and require the plaintiff to take it, we obligate the plaintiff to take the oath or to depart.

הלכה ה
הָיָה מְחֻיָּב שְׁבוּעָה מִדִּבְרֵיהֶם מִן הַנִּשְׁבָּעִין וְנִפְטָרִין כְּגוֹן הַנִּשְׁבָּעִין עַל טַעֲנַת סָפֵק אוֹ מִן הַנִּשְׁבָּעִין הֶסֵּת וְלֹא רָצָה לְהִשָּׁבַע מְשַׁמְּתִין אוֹתוֹ שְׁלֹשִׁים יוֹם אִם לֹא בָּא וְלֹא תָּבַע נִדּוּיוֹ מַלְקִין אוֹתוֹ מַכַּת מַרְדּוּת. וְכָל מִי שֶׁחָלָה עָלָיו שַׁמְתָּא שְׁלֹשִׁים יוֹם מַכִּין אוֹתוֹ מַכַּת מַרְדּוּת וְאַחַר כָּךְ מַתִּירִין נִדּוּיוֹ. וְאֵין יוֹרְדִין לִנְכָסָיו לְפִי שֶׁאֵינוֹ מְחֻיָּב שְׁבוּעָה מִן הַתּוֹרָה:
כסף משנה
5.
If a defendant was obligated by Rabbinic decree to take an oath to be released from responsibility, e.g., those who must take an oath because of a doubt or those required to take a sh'vuat heset, and he did not want to take an oath, he is placed under a ban of ostracism for 30 days. If he does not come and seek to be released from his ban, he is given stripes for rebellious conduct.
Similarly, whenever a person has been placed under a ban of ostracism for 30 days, he is given stripes for rebellious conduct and then his ban is lifted. His property is not attached, because he is not required to take an oath by Scriptural Law.

הלכה ו
כָּל הַמְחֻיָּב שְׁבוּעַת הֶסֵּת אִם רָצָה לַהֲפֹךְ הַשְּׁבוּעָה עַל הַתּוֹבֵעַ הֲרֵי הַתּוֹבֵעַ נִשְׁבָּע הֶסֵּת וְנוֹטֵל מֵחֲבֵרוֹ. וְאֵין לְךָ מִי שֶׁנִּשְׁבָּע הֶסֵּת וְנוֹטֵל מֵחֲבֵרוֹ אֶלָּא זֶה שֶׁנֶּהְפְּכָה עָלָיו שְׁבוּעַת הֶסֵּת. וְאֵין לְךָ שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁתֵּהָפֵךְ אֶלָּא שְׁבוּעַת הֶסֵּת בִּלְבַד. אֲבָל שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁל תּוֹרָה אוֹ שֶׁל דִּבְרֵיהֶם שֶׁהִיא כְּעֵין שֶׁל תּוֹרָה אֵין הוֹפְכִין שְׁבוּעָתָן:
כסף משנה
6.
Whenever a person is obligated to take a sh'vuat heset, if he desires, he may reverse the oath and obligate the plaintiff. The plaintiff may take the sh'vuat heset and then collect his claim from his colleague.
There is no other person who takes a sh'vuat heset and collects his claim from his colleague except this person for whom the obligation to take a sh'vuat heset. A Scriptural oath and a Rabbinic oath that resembles a Scriptural oath may not be reversed.

הלכה ז
אֵין מַשְׁבִּיעִין שְׁבוּעַת הֶסֵּת אֶלָּא עַל טַעֲנַת וַדַּאי אֲבָל עַל טַעֲנַת סָפֵק פָּטוּר. כֵּיצַד. כִּמְדֻמֶּה לִי שֶׁיֵּשׁ לִי אֶצְלְךָ מָנֶה אוֹ שֶׁאָמַר מָנֶה הִלְוֵיתִיךָ וְכִמְדֻמֶּה לִי שֶׁלֹּא פְּרַעְתַּנִי. אָמַר לִי אַבָּא שֶׁיֵּשׁ לִי אֶצְלְךָ מָנֶה אוֹ צִוָּה לִי בִּפְנֵי עֵדִים שֶׁיֵּשׁ לִי אֶצְלְךָ מָנֶה. דָּבָר פְּלוֹנִי נִגְנַב מִבֵּיתִי וְלֹא הָיָה שָׁם אֶלָּא אַתָּה קָרוֹב בְּעֵינֵי שֶׁאַתָּה גְּנָבַתּוּ. חִשַּׁבְתִּי מָעוֹת וּמָצָאתִי חָסֵר שֶׁמָּא אַתָּה הִטְעֵיתַנִי בְּחֶשְׁבּוֹן. וְהַנִּתְבָּע אוֹמֵר אֵין לְךָ בְּיָדִי כְּלוּם הֲרֵי זֶה פָּטוּר אַף מִשְּׁבוּעַת הֶסֵּת. וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּזֶה:
כסף משנה
7.
A person cannot be required to take a sh'vuat heset unless a definite claim is lodged against him. If, however, the plaintiff's claim is doubt, the defendant is not liable for the oath.
What is implied? The plaintiff says: "It appears to me that you owe me a maneh," "I lent you a maneh, it appears to me that you did not repay me," "My father said that you owe me a maneh, "My father declared to me in the presence of witnesses that you owe me a maneh," "A certain article was stolen from my house. You were the only person there. In my eyes, it is likely that you stole it," "I calculated the money I have and I found that I was lacking some. Perhaps you caused me to err in the accounting," and to all these complaints, the defendant states: "I do not owe you anything," he is not liable even for a sh'vuat heset. The same applies in all analogous situations.

הלכה ח
כּוֹר חִטִּים יֵשׁ לִי בְּיָדְךָ בְּוַדַּאי וְהַנִּתְבָּע אוֹמֵר אֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ שֶׁמָּא יֵשׁ לְךָ שֶׁמָּא אֵין לְךָ הֲרֵי הַנִּתְבָּע יִשָּׁבַע שְׁבוּעַת הֶסֵּת שֶׁאֵינוֹ יוֹדֵעַ וְנִפְטָר. לְפִי שֶׁלֹּא חִיֵּב עַצְמוֹ בְּוַדַּאי. וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּזֶה. כּוֹר חִטִּים יֵשׁ לִי בְּיָדְךָ בְּוַדַּאי וְהַנִּתְבָּע אוֹמֵר אֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ אִם חִטִּים הוּא אוֹ שְׂעוֹרִים הֲרֵי זֶה נִשְׁבָּע הֶסֵּת שֶׁאֵינוֹ יוֹדֵעַ וּמְשַׁלֵּם שְׂעוֹרִין. וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּזֶה:
כסף משנה
8.
The defendant is required to take a sh'vuat heset in the following situations. The plaintiff claims: "You definitely owe me a kor of wheat," and the defendant replies: "I don't know. Maybe I owe you, maybe I do not owe you," the defendant must take a sh'vuat heset that he does not know of the obligation. He is then released. He is not liable, because he did not definitely obligate himself. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.
Similarly, if the plaintiff claims: "You definitely owe me a kor of wheat," and the defendant replies: "I don't know whether I owe you a kor of wheat or barley," the defendant must take a sh'vuat heset that he does not know and pay the plaintiff a kor of barley. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.

הלכה ט
מָנֶה יֵשׁ לִי בְּיָדְךָ בְּוַדַּאי וְהַנִּתְבָּע אוֹמֵר כֵּן הָיָה לְךָ בְּיָדִי אֲבָל אֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ אִם הֶחְזַרְתִּי לְךָ אוֹ עֲדַיִן לֹא הֶחְזַרְתִּי לְךָ חַיָּב לְשַׁלֵּם וְלֹא יִשָּׁבַע הַתּוֹבֵעַ כְּלָל אֲפִלּוּ שְׁבוּעַת הֶסֵּת. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא יוֹדֵעַ בְּוַדַּאי שֶׁהוּא חַיָּב וַהֲרֵי זֶה טוֹעֵן אוֹתוֹ טַעֲנַת וַדַּאי וְנִסְתַּפֵּק אִם נִפְטַר אוֹ לֹא נִפְטַר. וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּזֶה. אֲבָל אִם אֵין לוֹ תּוֹבֵעַ וְהוֹדָה מֵעַצְמוֹ וְאָמַר גְּזַלְתִּיךָ אוֹ הִלְוֵיתַנִי מָנֶה. אָבִיךָ הִפְקִיד אֶצְלִי מָנֶה וְאֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ אִם הֶחְזַרְתִּיו אוֹ לֹא הֶחְזַרְתִּיו. אֵינוֹ חַיָּב לְשַׁלֵּם. וְאִם בָּא לָצֵאת יְדֵי שָׁמַיִם חַיָּב לְשַׁלֵּם:
כסף משנה
9.
Different rules apply when the plaintiff claims: "You definitely owe me a maneh," and the defendant replies: "I did owe you a maneh. I do not know, however, if I returned it to you or did not return it to you yet." The defendant is obligated to pay. The plaintiff is not obligated to take an oath at all, not even a sh'vuat heset.
The rationale is that the defendant knows that he was liable and the plaintiff is lodging a definite claim against him, and he does not know whether he fulfilled his obligation or not. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.
This stringency does not apply if there is no plaintiff, i.e., on his own initiative, the defendant said: "I stole from you...", "You lent me a maneh...", "Your father entrusted me with a maneh, and I do not know if I returned it to you or not, he is not liable at all. If he desires to fulfill his moral and spiritual obligations, he is liable to make restitution.

הלכה י
מָנֶה לִי בְּיָדְךָ. אֵין לְךָ בְּיָדִי כְּלוּם. הִשָּׁבַע הֶסֵּת וְלֵךְ. הִשָּׁבַע אַתָּה הֶסֵּת וְטל. וְאָמַר הַתּוֹבֵעַ אֵינִי רוֹצֶה לְהִשָּׁבַע הֲרֵי הַנִּתְבָּע אוֹמֵר לוֹ הִשָּׁבַע וְטל אוֹ תֵּלֵךְ בְּלֹא כְּלוּם. וְאֵין שָׁם הִפּוּךְ אַחֵר וְיֵשׁ לוֹ לְהַחֲרִים סְתָם עַל מִי שֶׁהוּא חַיָּב לִי וְלֹא יִתֵּן לִי:
כסף משנה
10.
As mentioned above, a sh'vuat heset can be reversed. Thus if a plaintiff claims: "You owe me a maneh," and the defendant responds: "I do not owe you anything," the plaintiff may tell him: "Take a sh'vuat heset and go on your way." And the defendant may respond: "You take the sh'vuat heset and collect your claim." If the plaintiff says: "I do not desire to take the oath," the defendant may tell him: "Either take the oath and collect your claim or go away without anything." The obligation to take the oath may not be reversed again. The plaintiff may, however, have a conditional bill of ostracism issued against anyone who owes him money and refuses to pay.

הלכה יא
הוֹרוּ רַבּוֹתַי שֶׁכָּל מִי שֶׁנִּתְחַיֵּב שְׁבוּעָה בֵּין שֶׁל תּוֹרָה בֵּין שֶׁל דִּבְרֵיהֶם אֲפִלּוּ הֶסֵּת. יֵשׁ לוֹ לְהַחֲרִים סְתָם קֹדֶם שֶׁיִּשָּׁבַע עַל מִי שֶׁיִּטְעֹן עָלָיו דָּבָר שֶׁאֵינוֹ חַיָּב בּוֹ כְּדֵי שֶׁיַּשְׁבִּיעַ אוֹתוֹ בְּחִנָּם וְיַעֲנֶה הַמַּשְׁבִּיעַ אָמֵן וְאַחַר יִשָּׁבַע. וְתַקָּנָה טוֹבָה לְבַעֲלֵי דִּינִין כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּמָּנְעוּ מִטַּעֲנַת שֶׁקֶר וְלֹא יִגְרְמוּ לְהוֹצִיא שֵׁם שָׁמַיִם לְבַטָּלָה וְלֹא יַשִּׂיאוֹ שֵׁמַע שָׁוְא:
כסף משנה
11.
My masters ruled that anyone who is obligated to take an oath - whether a Scriptural oath or a Rabbinic oath, even a sh'vuat heset - may, before taking the oath, have a conditional ban of ostracism issued against anyone who lodges a claim against him for money which he does not owe so that he will have to take an oath unnecessarily. The person requiring him to take the oath must answer Amen. Afterwards, the defendant must take that oath.
This is a proper ordinance for litigants so that they will refrain from making false claims and not cause God's name to be mentioned for no purpose, thus preventing them from lodging spurious suits.

הלכה יב
כָּל מִי שֶׁנִּתְחַיֵּב שְׁבוּעָה בֵּין שֶׁל תּוֹרָה בֵּין שֶׁל דִּבְרֵיהֶם מְגַלְגֵּל עָלָיו הַמַּשְׁבִּיעַ כָּל מַה שֶּׁיִּרְצֶה מִדְּבָרִים שֶׁאִם יוֹדֶה בָּהֶן יִתְחַיֵּב מָמוֹן. וְעַד הֵיכָן כֹּחַ גִּלְגּוּל עַד שֶׁיֹּאמַר וּבִכְלַל שְׁבוּעָה זוֹ שֶׁלֹּא נִמְכַּרְתָּ לִי בְּעֶבֶד עִבְרִי וַעֲדַיִן עַבְדִּי אַתָּה. וּכְבָר בֵּאַרְנוּ שֶׁאֵין מְגַלְגְּלִין עַל הַשָּׂכִיר:
כסף משנה
12.
Whenever a person is required to take an oath - whether a Scriptural oath or a Rabbinic oath - the plaintiff can require him to include in his oath a denial of any other claim that he desires which would obligate the defendant financially.
To what extent can he be forced to include a claim? Until the plaintiff has him include in the oath that he was not sold to the plaintiff as a Hebrew servant and is still under his bond.
As mentioned, a worker who is required to take an oath cannot be forced to include other claims in that oath.

הלכה יג
מִי שֶׁנִּתְחַיֵּב שְׁבוּעָה אֲפִלּוּ הֶסֵּת וְהִתְחִיל הַתּוֹבֵעַ לְגַלְגֵּל עָלָיו דְּבָרִים אֲחֵרִים שֶׁלֹּא טָעַן אוֹתָם. וְרָאָה הַנִּתְבָּע כָּךְ וְאָמַר אֵינִי רוֹצֶה לְהִשָּׁבַע אֶלָּא הֲרֵינִי מְשַׁלֵּם הַטַּעֲנָה הָרִאשׁוֹנָה שֶׁנִּתְחַיַּבְתִּי עַל כְּפִירָתָהּ שְׁבוּעָה. אֵין שׁוֹמְעִין לוֹ אֶלָּא אוֹמְרִים לַנִּתְבָּע אוֹ תֵּן לוֹ כָּל מַה שֶּׁגִּלְגֵּל עָלֶיךָ מִטְּעָנוֹת הַוַּדָּאִיּוֹת אוֹ הִשָּׁבַע וְהִפָּטֵר:
כסף משנה
13.
The following principle applies whenever a person is obligated to take an oath, even a sh'vuat heset, and the plaintiff begins to demand that he include in the oath matters which were not included in the original claim. If the defendant sees this and says: "I do not desire to take the oath. Instead, I will pay the original claim whose denial obligated me to take the oath," we do not accept his request. Instead, we tell him: "Either pay all the definite claims he asked you to include in the oath or take the oath and be released of responsibility."

הלכה יד
הַטּוֹעֵן אֶת חֲבֵרוֹ טְעָנוֹת הַרְבֵּה אֵין מַשְׁבִּיעִין אוֹתוֹ עַל כָּל טַעֲנָה וְטַעֲנָה אֶלָּא שְׁבוּעָה אַחַת עַל הַכּל. נִתְחַיֵּב שְׁתֵּי שְׁבוּעוֹת עַל שְׁתֵּי טְעָנוֹת קַלָּה וַחֲמוּרָה. מַשְׁבִּיעִין אוֹתוֹ עַל הַחֲמוּרָה וּמְגַלְגְּלִין בָּהּ שְׁאָר דְּבָרִים:
כסף משנה
14.
When a person lodges many claims against a colleague, the defendant cannot be forced to take an oath on each claim individually. Instead, he includes all the claims in one oath. If a person was obligated to take two oaths on two different claims, one lenient and one more severe, he is required to take the more severe oath and include in it the other claims based on the principle of gilgul sh'vuah.

הלכה טו
כָּל הַטּוֹעֵן אֶת חֲבֵרוֹ טַעֲנָה שֶׁאִם הוֹדָה אֵינוֹ חַיָּב לְשַׁלֵּם מָמוֹן. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁכָּפַר אֵין מְחַיְּבִין אוֹתוֹ שְׁבוּעַת הֶסֵּת וְלֹא חֵרֶם סְתָם. כֵּיצַד. אָמַרְתָּ שֶׁתִּתֵּן לִי מָנֶה. לֹא הָיוּ דְּבָרִים מֵעוֹלָם. אֵין מַשְׁבִּיעִין אוֹתוֹ הֶסֵּת וְלֹא חֵרֶם שֶׁאִלּוּ הוֹדָה בְּדָבָר זֶה אֵינוֹ חַיָּב כְּלוּם. אַתָּה קִלַּלְתָּ אוֹתִי אַתָּה הוֹצֵאתָ עָלַי שֵׁם רַע לֹא הָיוּ דְּבָרִים מֵעוֹלָם אֵין מַחְרִימִין עַל זֶה. וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּזֶה מִדְּבָרִים אֵלּוּ:
כסף משנה
15.
When a person lodges a claim against a colleague which would not result in a financial obligation if he would acknowledge its truth, even if the defendant denies the claim, we do not require him to take a sh'vuat heset, nor do we issue a conditional ban of ostracism.
What is implied? The plaintiff claims: "You promised to give me a maneh," and the defendant states: "That never happened," the defendant is not required to take a sh'vuat heset, nor is a conditional ban of ostracism issued against him. The rationale is that even were he to have acknowledged making such a promise, he would not be obligated to fulfill it. Similarly, if a plaintiff claimed: "You cursed me," or "You spread a disparaging report about me," and the defendant replied: "That never happened," a ban of ostracism is not issued in such a situation. Similar principles apply in all analogous situations.

הלכה טז
אַתָּה חָבַלְתָּ בִּי לֹא הָיוּ דְּבָרִים מֵעוֹלָם הֲרֵי זֶה נִשְׁבָּע הֶסֵּת שֶׁאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינוֹ מְשַׁלֵּם קְנָס עַל פִּי עַצְמוֹ מְשַׁלֵּם שֶׁבֶת וְרִפּוּי וּבשֶׁת. אַתָּה בִּיַּשְׁתַּנִי לֹא הָיוּ דְּבָרִים מֵעוֹלָם. אִם הָיוּ בְּמָקוֹם שֶׁגּוֹבִין בּוֹ קְנָסוֹת הֲרֵי זֶה נִשְׁבָּע הֶסֵּת. שֶׁאִלּוּ הוֹדָה הָיָה מְשַׁלֵּם הַבֹּשֶׁת:
כסף משנה
16.
If a plaintiff claims: "You injured me," and the defendant states: "That never happened," the defendant is required to take a sh'vuat heset. The rationale is although the defendant is not liable to pay a k'nas because of his own admission alone, he would be liable to pay the injured party for his unemployment, his medical expenses, and the embarrassment he suffered.
The following rule applies when a plaintiff claims: "You embarrassed me," and the defendant states: "That never happened." If they were in a place where claims involving k'nasot were collected, the defendant is required to take a sh'vuat heset, for if he would acknowledge the truth of the claim, he would be required to pay for the embarrassment he caused.

הלכה יז
בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים שֶׁהַמּוֹדֶה בִּקְנָס פָּטוּר כְּשֶׁהוֹדָה בְּדָבָר שֶׁחַיָּב עָלָיו קְנָס כְּגוֹן שֶׁאָמַר חָבַלְתִּי בָּזֶה. אֲבָל אִם אָמַר חָבַלְתִּי בָּזֶה וְהֵבִיא עָלַי עֵדִים בְּבֵית דִּין וְחִיְּבוּנִי לִתֵּן כָּךְ וְכָךְ בִּנְזָקַי הֲרֵי זֶה חַיָּב לְשַׁלֵּם. לְפִיכָךְ אִם טָעַן הַטּוֹעֵן שֶׁבֵּית דִּין חִיְּבוּךָ לְשַׁלֵּם לִי מֵאָה דִּינָרִין מִשּׁוּם שֶׁחָבַלְתָּ בִּי וְהוּא אוֹמֵר לֹא הָיוּ דְּבָרִים מֵעוֹלָם. הֲרֵי זֶה נִשְׁבָּע הֶסֵּת. וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּזֶה:
כסף משנה
17.
When do we apply the above statement: "A person who admits his guilt with regard to a claim involving a k'nas is not liable"? When the defendant says: "I injured this person."
If, however, the defendant says: "I injured this person. He brought witnesses against me in court and it obligated me to pay so and so much for his damages," he is liable. Accordingly, were the plaintiff to claim that a court obligated the defendant to pay him 100 dinarim because he injured him, and the defendant denied the claim, the defendant would be required to take a sh'vuat heset. Similar principles apply in all analogous situations.

משפטים הלכות טוען ונטען פרק א
Mishpatim To`en and Nitan Chapter 1