Commentary for Bava Batra 342:17

אמר ליה רבינא לרב אשי ואמרי לה רב אשי לרב כהנא

in Tishri, and in the meantime he would obtain some money and repay him. When [however the debtor] requested the return of his<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'and said to him, give me my'. ');">³¹</span> bond, he would reply to him, 'I lost it', and would [instead] write out for him a quittance. When [later] the date of payment<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'its time'. ');">³²</span> arrived he would produce it<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The postdated deed. ');">³³</span> and plead 'You have borrowed from me just now!' — He<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Hamnuna. ');">³⁴</span> holds the opinion that no receipt is to be written.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The creditor must return the bond itself before he can receive repayment of the debt. ');">³⁵</span> Said R. Yemar to R. Kahana, and others say [that] R. Jeremiah of Difti said to R. Kahana: But [what of] the present time, when postdated deeds are written though quittances also are written?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' How, in view of what has been said above, could a postdated deed be permitted where a receipt also is allowed? ');">³⁶</span> He replied to him:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' for this reading. v. Rashb., R. Gersh. and BaH, a.l. ');">³⁷</span> [This is permissible] since the time when R. Abba said to his scribes: 'When you write a postdated deed, write as follows: This deed was not written on the date indicated<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'in its time'. ');">³⁸</span> but was postdated.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'we delayed (or postponed) it and wrote it.' ');">³⁹</span> Said R. Ashi to R. Kahana: And [what of] the present time when this is not done!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' No formula such as that introduced by R. Abba is entered in a postdated deed, though the writing of a quittance is permitted! ');">⁴⁰</span> — [This<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Abba's formula. ');">⁴¹</span> is not necessary] since R. Safra instructed his scribes: When you write out quittances, enter the date of the deed<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the quittance must not only contain the names of the creditor and debtor as well as the amount of the loan, but also the date of the bond in lieu of which the quittance is given. Consequently should the creditor ever attempt to make use of the cancelled bond because it was postdated the debtor would be in a position to expose him by means of the quittance in which the date of that bond is entered. ');">⁴²</span> if you know it; if not, leave the quittance undated so that whenever [the deed] is produced [the receipt] will render it invalid.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since the receipt is undated and contains all the particulars (such as names of parties and amount) of the bond, it can be used by the borrower against the creditor whenever the latter should attempt to advance a claim by means of that bond. Whether the date of the bond is earlier, or later than that on which the quittance was written matters little, since the quittance, being undated, can always be presented as a document written after the date of the bond. The issue of such an undated quittance, however, would naturally preclude the creditor from ever lending the debtor a sum equal to that in the bond in question. ');">⁴³</span> Said Rabina to R. Ashi, and others say [that] R. Ashi [said] to R. Kahana:

Explore commentary for Bava Batra 342:17. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.