183:
he could have said that the item never belonged to the possessing party?"). The predominant reason for this is that the burden of proof is on the claimant (Hebrew ืืืืฆืื ืืืืืจื ืขืืื ืืจืืื) and therefore even though a defendant can avoid payment using the Migu as a defense, it is not sufficient proof for the claimant. Another point is that this would open endless opportunities for con men (Many Jewish laws are designed to make con games more difficult)This is the opinion of the
Tosafists. The Ramban among other Rishonim disagree with this rule and contend that it is a valid reasoning. Some explain that the root of the question lies in understanding Migu's properties as a tool in court. The Tosafists felt that a Migu is a leverage tool (Hebrew, ืื ืืืขื ื), meaning that if a person chose to make a less favorable claim over a more favorable one, he is given the benefit of the doubt, although he is not necessarily believed based on his Migu, therefore his Migu can only deflect charges but not charge others. The Ramban on the other hand felt that Migu provides proof of the legitimacy of the claim, it can therefore be used as an attack tool.
175:
litigant cannot use Migu as a defense. The reasoning is that the witnesses are "stronger" than the Migu. (This means that in the order of acceptance of proofs and logic the court of law will rule based on the stronger proof/logic.) A second meaning to "Migu in the place of witnesses" is similar yet very different from the first. That is, when witnesses support the alternative claim, thereby destroying the litigant's position, as the litigant can no longer claim that if he was looking to win dishonestly he/she would have claimed the alternative. Because the alternative is no longer possible. This exception is true even if the witnesses bear testimony after the litigant made his/her claim. (see Rabbi Busel On Migu)
179:
claim (Hebrew, ืืืื ืืืขืื ืื ืืืจืื ื) or it is well known that the particular proposed fact is untrue, even if the claimant can't prove it. The logic behind this exception is elementary. The Migu lends credibility to the defendant by asking the question: "if he is lying in an effort to exempt himself from paying his dues, he should have told more believable lie". If the court can find a probable reason why he would avoid telling the harder-to-disprove story, then the entire logic falls apart.
162:. However, in this scenario the borrower would prevail under the theory that he must be telling the truth, as if he were interested in lying to the court, he could have simply said that the loan never happened. Since the lender cannot prove the existence of the loan, that claim would have prevailed. Therefore, the claim that the loan was repaid is believed as well. This is a classic Migu, although many cases of Migu exist to support a position in court.
25:
182:
A third rule in the non acception of Migu's is that "a Migu to extract is not said" (Hebrew ืืืื ืืืืฆืื ืื ืืืจืื ื). This means that the logic of Migu will not be accepted on the claimants side. ("Why did he claim that the item used to belong to the possessing party and that he had bought it from him,
178:
Another exception would be if the proposed alternative claim is considered to be an embarrassment to the defendant. Cases that would qualify are, if the story being told is embarrassing by its very nature, it is a highly unlikely story and a person would not be so brazen as to make the alternative
165:
Other cases in which Migu is invoked are cases in which witnesses might have a personal gain in testifying, which would normally disqualify the testimony. If another option can be found for the witnesses to achieve the same personal gain, some authorities rule that the testimony can be accepted.
174:
There are exceptions to the rule of Migu, perhaps the most common one is known as "Migu in the place of witnesses" (Hebrew ืืืื ืืืงืื ืขืืื). This takes on two meanings. The first is that in a case in which the claimant has irrefutable proof - such as valid witnesses - supporting his claim, the
157:
on an oral loan made without witnesses, the borrower may prevail in the case by claiming that the loan did occur, but that it had already been repaid. Normally, when one makes a claim that a loan has been repaid, he would be expected to produce evidence that it had been repaid, such as a
136:
could have prevailed in the case based on a different claim were he disposed to lie. To be effective, the logic underlying the migu must be impeccable and there are a variety of cases in which the Migu argument is invalid.
132:
concept relating to civil law disputes. A migu is a reason that a claim that would otherwise be rejected by a Jewish civil court should be accepted based on the fact that the
224:
108:
46:
89:
35:
61:
68:
42:
75:
57:
218:
154:
129:
82:
24:
133:
159:
150:
145:
One classic example of where a Migu does work is in the area of a
146:
18:
49:. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
8:
128:(translation: "since") (Hebrew: ืืืื) is a
109:Learn how and when to remove this message
208:First Tosafis to Talmud, Bava Basra 32b
192:
7:
47:adding citations to reliable sources
14:
199:Tosafis to Talmud, Baba metzia 2b
23:
153:accuses an alleged borrower of
34:needs additional citations for
1:
149:repayment dispute. Where the
141:Example of an effective Migu
225:Jewish courts and civil law
241:
170:Exceptions to the rule
43:improve this article
16:Talmud law concept
119:
118:
111:
93:
232:
209:
206:
200:
197:
114:
107:
103:
100:
94:
92:
51:
27:
19:
240:
239:
235:
234:
233:
231:
230:
229:
215:
214:
213:
212:
207:
203:
198:
194:
189:
172:
143:
115:
104:
98:
95:
52:
50:
40:
28:
17:
12:
11:
5:
238:
236:
228:
227:
217:
216:
211:
210:
201:
191:
190:
188:
185:
171:
168:
142:
139:
117:
116:
31:
29:
22:
15:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
237:
226:
223:
222:
220:
205:
202:
196:
193:
186:
184:
180:
176:
169:
167:
163:
161:
156:
152:
148:
140:
138:
135:
131:
127:
123:
113:
110:
102:
91:
88:
84:
81:
77:
74:
70:
67:
63:
60: โ
59:
55:
54:Find sources:
48:
44:
38:
37:
32:This article
30:
26:
21:
20:
204:
195:
181:
177:
173:
164:
144:
130:Talmudic law
125:
121:
120:
105:
96:
86:
79:
72:
65:
53:
41:Please help
36:verification
33:
187:References
155:defaulting
69:newspapers
219:Category
134:litigant
99:May 2020
160:receipt
83:scholar
151:lender
85:
78:
71:
64:
58:"Migu"
56:
126:miggo
90:JSTOR
76:books
147:loan
122:Migu
62:news
124:or
45:by
221::
112:)
106:(
101:)
97:(
87:ยท
80:ยท
73:ยท
66:ยท
39:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.