יט ויחלוקו נמי דאמרן לדמי דאי לא תימא הכי שנים אוחזין בטלית הכי נמי דפלגי הא אפסדוה הא לא קשיא
19 [thereof], but if one [claimant] clings to the form, and the other clings to the operative part, one takes the form and the other takes the operative part. And R. Johanan says: They always divide equally. [What!] Even if one clings to the form and the other to the operative part? Was it not taught: Each one takes as much as his hand grasps?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So here also each claimant should receive the part which he holds, irrespective of its value or importance. ');"><sup>17</sup></span> — [Yes.] But it is necessary [to have R. Johanan's decision] in a case where the operative part is contained in the middle [of the document].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' There is really no difference between the views of R. Johanan and R. Eleazar, as the words of R. Johanan are only intended to make clear that if the operative part happens to be in the middle of the document the litigants receive half each. ');"><sup>18</sup></span> But if so, what need is there to state it?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As it is in full accord with the view of R. Eleazar, and it would be self-understood. ');"><sup>19</sup></span> — It is necessary [to state it that it may be applied to a case] where [the operative part] is nearer to one [of the claimants].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Johanan deems it necessary to emphasise that 'they always divide equally' so as to include a case where the operative part is nearer to the grasp of one of the claimants, though not actually held by him. ');"><sup>20</sup></span> You might assume that one could say to the other, 'Divide it this way', therefore we are informed that the other may say to him: 'What makes you think of dividing it this way? Divide it the other way.' R. Aha of Difti said to Rabina: According to R. Eleazar, who says. 'One takes the form [of the bill] and the other takes the operative part.' — of what use are [the parts] to either of them? Does one need them to use as a stopper for one's bottle?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A familiar expression used in connection with a document which has no value and can only be used as paper. ');"><sup>21</sup></span> — He [Rabina] answered him: [It is] the estimated value thereof [that has to be considered]. We estimate how much a dated document is worth as compared with one undated: with a dated document a debt may be collected from mortgaged property, but with the other [document] no debt can be collected from mortgaged property<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The absence of a date makes it impossible for a Court to say whether the debt recorded in the document was contracted before or after the mortgage was taken on the property. As the date is given in the operative part only, it enhances the value of that part. ');"><sup>22</sup></span> — and one gives the other the difference [in the value of the two documents]. Also [the decision previously given in the words], 'They shall divide,' as quoted,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The decision of R. Simeon b. Gamaliel; v. supra p. 32. ');"><sup>23</sup></span> refers to the value [of the bill]. For if you do not assume this, [how explain:] 'TWO HOLD A GARMENT' [etc.]? Would you say that here also they divide [the garment] in halves? They would surely render it useless! — This presents no difficulty,