Bava Metzia 38

הא בבריא והא בשכיב מרע

One law refers to [a gift made by] a healthy person, and the other law refers to [that of] a dying person:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The deeds of gift are written differently in the two cases, the dying person's deed containing the formula: 'As he was ill and confined to his bed.' ');">¹</span>

מתניתין דקתני הא אמר תנו נותנין בשכיב מרע דבר מהדר הוא

Our Mishnah, which teaches [by implication] that if [the person who lost the document says,] 'Give it,' it is given, refers to [a gift made by] a dying person, who is in a position to retract.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., he may yet change his mind and write a second deed, conferring the gift upon another person, and then the latter acquires it. ');">²</span>

דאמרינן מאי איכא למימר דלמא כתבה מעיקרא להאי ואמליך ולא יהבה ניהליה והדר כתבה לאיניש אחרינא ויהביה ניהליה השתא קא הדר ביה מההוא דיהבה ניהליה

For we say: What is there to apprehend? That he may originally have written the deed for this person<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To whom he says the document should be returned. ');">³</span>

אי במתנת בריא יהבה ליה לית ליה פסידא דכי נפקא תרתי בתרייתא זכי דהא הדר ביה מקמייתא

and then changed his mind and not given it to him, and that he may then have written a deed again for another person and given it to him, but now he has made up his mind not to let him have it!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'he retracts from the one to whom he gave it.' ');">⁴</span>

אי במתנת שכיב מרע נמי יהבה ניהליה לית בה פסידא דבתרייתא זכי דקא הדר ביה מקמייתא

If he gave it to the latter as the gift of a healthy person the latter suffers no loss [as a result of the donor's present change of mind], for when the two [documents] are produced the later [document] confers possession, as he retracted from the former. If, however, he gave it also to the latter as the gift of a dying person, the latter suffers no loss either, as [in such a case] the last person acquires [the gift],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As it is always the last word of a dying person that has legal validity. [So that in any case the person to whom the deed was actually given stands to lose nothing by the return of the earlier dated deed to the one in whose name the found deed is made out.] ');">⁵</span>

כי קתני בברייתא אע"פ ששניהם מודים לא יחזיר לא לזה ולא לזה בבריא דלאו בר מהדר הוא

because [the donor] withdrew it from the former. But the Baraitha, which teaches that even if both parties admit [the validity of the found document] it shall not be returned to either party, deals with a healthy person, who cannot withdraw,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' He cannot change his mind after he has made a gift to a person and handed him the document conferring the gift. ');">⁶</span>

דאמרינן דלמא כתבה להאי מעיקרא ואמליך ולא יהבה ליה והדר כתבה לאיניש אחרינא ויהבה ליה השתא קא הדר ביה מההוא דיהבה ליה וסבר מהדר לא מצינא הדרנא בי אימר להו דאנא להאי יהבתא וניהדרו ניהליה כתבא כי היכי דכי מפיק האי כתבא דקדים זכה ביה הוא

[and the reason why the document is not returned is] that we say: Maybe [the donor] wrote it originally for this person,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To whom he says the document should be returned. ');">³</span>

אלא אמרינן ליה אנן האי כתבא לא יהבינן ליה להאי דלמא מכתב כתבת מיהב לא יהבת ניהליה ויהבתה לאיניש אחרינא וקא הדרת ביה אי לא יהבתה לאיניש אחרינא וקא בעית דתתבה להאי כתיב ליה השתא כתבא אחרינא ויהביה ניהליה דאי יהבת לאיניש אחרינא לית בה פסידא דקדים זכי

and then he changed his mind and did not give it to him; he then wrote another [document] for another person and gave it to him, but now he has made up his mind not to let him have it, and he argues [thus]: I cannot [legally] withdraw [the gift from him]. I will [therefore] tell them [the judges] that I gave it to this [person], so that they will return the document to him, and when he produces this earlier document he will be entitled [to the gift]. We therefore say to him [the donor]: We cannot give this document to this [person],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To whom he says the document should be returned. ');">³</span>

מתקיף לה רב זביד והא אידי ואידי דייתקאות קא תני אלא אמר רב זביד הא והא בשכיב מרע ולא קשיא הא ביה והא בבריה

as it may be that you did write it for him but did not give it to him, and that you gave it to a different person instead, and now you have changed your mind again. Now, if you have not really given it to a different person, and you now wish to give it to this person, write him now another document and give it to him — for if you [formerly] did give [a document] to another person he will suffer no loss [because of the document you will write now], as [the person who holds the document with] the earlier date will be entitled to the gift.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As a healthy person cannot invalidate a document by a later document. ');">⁷</span>

מתניתין דקא אמר תנו נותנין בדידיה דבר מהדר הוא דאמרינן א"נ יהבה לאיניש אחרינא לית בה פסידא דקמא ובתרא בתרא זכי דהא הדר ביה מקמא

But, asked R. Zebid, do not both [the Mishnah and the Baraitha] deal with last wills?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' How then could it be said that the Baraitha deals with the gift made by a healthy person? ');">⁸</span>

כי קא תני בברייתא אע"פ ששניהם מודים לא יחזיר לא לזה ולא לזה בבריה

— Therefore R. Zebid said: Both teachings deal with [a gift made by] a dying person, and there is no contradiction: One deals with [the donor] himself,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the dying person, who is still alive when the document is found, and who orders the document to be given to the person named therein. ');">⁹</span>

דאמרינן דלמא כתב אבוה להאי ואמלך ולא יהביה ניהליה ובתר אבוה כתב איהו לאיניש אחרינא ויהבה ליה והשתא קא הדר ביה מההוא סבר מהדר לא מצינא הדרנא בי אימר להו דאבא יהבה ליה להאי ונתבו ליה כתביה וניזיל ונפיק מיניה דהוא זכי ונפלוג בהדיה

and the other deals with his son:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' After the death of the father, and the son claims the document. ');">¹⁰</span>

הלכך אמרינן ליה אנן האי כתבא לא יהבינן ליה להאי דדלמא מכתב כתביה אבוה מיהב לא יהבה ליה ויהבתיה את לאיניש אחרינא וקא הדרת ביה

Our Mishnah, which implies that if [the person who lost the document] says, 'Give it [to the person named in the document],' it is given to him, refers to [the donor] himself, who is entitled to withdraw, [and the reason why the document is thus given is] that we say: Even if [the donor] had given it to another person,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And then decided not to let him have it. ');">¹¹</span>

אלא אי קושטא קא אמרת דיהב ליה אבוך זיל את השתא כתיב ליה שטרא אחרינא דאי נמי לא יהבה ליה אבוה וכתבתיה את לאיניש אחרינא לית בה פסידא דקמא ובתרא קמא זכי:

that person would suffer no loss [as a result of the donor's change of mind], for if the first [document] and the last [are produced] the last is valid, as the first was withdrawn.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And a dying person is entitled to change his mind, and he who produces the document with the later date is legally entitled to the gift. ');">¹²</span>

ת"ר מצא שובר בזמן שהאשה מודה יחזיר לבעל אין האשה מודה לא יחזיר לא לזה ולא לזה

But the Baraitha, which teaches that even if both parties admit [the validity of the document] it shall not be returned to either party, refers to the son, [and the reason why the document is not returned is] that we say: Maybe the father wrote it for this person<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the person named in the found document to whom the son says the deed should be returned. ');">¹³</span>

בזמן שהאשה מודה מיהת יחזיר לבעל וליחוש דלמא כתבה ליתן בניסן ולא נתנה עד תשרי ואזלה זבנתה לכתובה בטובת הנאה מניסן עד תשרי

and he changed his mind and did not give it to him, and that after the father's [death] he [the son] wrote another deed for another man and gave it to him, but now he has made up his mind not to let him have it, [and] he argues [thus]: 'I cannot legally withdraw [the gift from him]. I will [therefore] tell them [the judges] that my father gave it to this person,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the person named in the found document to whom the son says the deed should be returned. ');">¹³</span>

ומפיק ליה לשובר דכתיב בניסן ואתא למטרף לקוחות שלא כדין

so that they will give the document to him, and we shall go and take [the gift] away from this other person,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To whom the son gave it. ');">¹⁴</span>

אמר רבא

as he [this person]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 121, n. 7. ');">¹⁵</span> will be legally entitled to it,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because of the son's statement that his father had given it to that person. ');">¹⁶</span> and we shall both share [in the gain].'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This indicates the motive which would prompt the son to make the false statement — a conspiracy between him and that person to obtain possession of the gift and to divide it. ');">¹⁷</span> We therefore say to him [the son]: We cannot give this document to this person,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 121, n. 7. ');">¹⁵</span> as it may be that your father did write it [for him] but did not give it to him, and that you gave it to a different person instead, and have now changed your mind. Now, if you speak the truth [in saying] that your father gave it to him, go now and write him another deed, for then, even if your father did not give it to him, and you wrote it for a different person, that other person will suffer no loss, for if the first document and the last are produced, the first is valid.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As when the two documents have been written by the son, who is a healthy person, the owner of the first document will be entitled to the gift, and the writing of the second document will make no difference. ');">¹⁸</span> Our Rabbis taught: If one finds a receipt<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In which a wife acknowledged having received payment of her Kethubah while she was still living with her husband. ');">¹⁹</span> [the law is that] when the wife admits [its genuineness] one shall return it to the husband, [and that] when the wife does not admit [its genuineness] one shall not return it to either party. It is thus taught that when the wife admits, [the document] shall be returned to the husband: Ought we not to apprehend that she may have written it with the intention of giving it [to the husband] in Nisan, and that [in reality] she did not give it [to him] until Tishri,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When she received payment. ');">²⁰</span> and that in the interval between Nisan and Tishri she went and sold [the value of] her <i>Kethubah</i> for a consideration,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'for the benefit of a pleasure'; for a trifle, as in view of the possibility of the wife's death preceding that of her husband the buyer of the Kethubah stands to lose the price he pays, and this reduces the value of the Kethubah if sold before it becomes due. ');">²¹</span> while the husband may produce the receipt, [showing] that it was written in Nisan,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So that the date of the receipt produced by the husband will be taken as proof that it preceded the sale of the Kethubah by the wife, and the buyer will lose his claim. ');">²²</span> and he will thus be able to deprive unlawfully those who bought [the value of the <i>Kethubah</i> of what is due to them]? — Raba answered: