Reference for Bava Metzia 24:23

אמר רב אסי

And if the debtor does not admit, why should [the finder] return [the documents where they do not contain a mortgage clause]? Granted that [the creditor] may not exact payment from encumbered property,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which the debtor disposed of after incurring the debt. ');">²²</span> but he may certainly exact payment from unencumbered property!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So that an injustice may still be done to the debtor, who may have paid the debt already, as he claims to have done. ');">²³</span> — Yes. [It is] indeed [a case] where the debtor admits his debt, but the reason [why the documents are not to be returned is this]: We apprehend that they might have been written to secure a loan [say] in Nisan<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The first month of the year, corresponding mostly to April. ');">²⁴</span> whereas the loan was not granted until Tishri,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The seventh month of the year, corresponding mostly to October. ');">²⁵</span> so that [the lender] would come to seize unlawfully the property bought [by others from the borrower during that space of time]. But if so, we ought to entertain the same fear as regards all documents that come before us? — Ordinary documents are not suspect, but these are suspect.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The fact that they were not properly taken care of, and were thus lost, would show that no importance was attached to them. There is thus a prima facie case against their validity. ');">²⁶</span> Then [the question arises] regarding the law that we learnt [in a Mishnah]: A note of indebtedness may be written for the borrower even when the lender is not present.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. B.B. 167b. ');">²⁷</span> How do we write it deliberately [seeing that] we ought to apprehend that the note might have been written with the intention of borrowing in Nisan, whereas the loan was not granted until Tishri, so that the lender would seize unlawfully the property [which others will have] bought [from the borrower during that space of time]!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 71, n. 2. ');">²⁸</span> — Said R. Assi:

Explore reference for Bava Metzia 24:23. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.