Bava Metzia 40

חיישינן לשני שוירי א"ל רב חסדא לרבה פוק עיין דלאורתא בעי לה רב הונא מינך נפק דק ואשכח דתנן כל מעשה ב"ד הרי זה יחזיר

We apprehend that there may be two [towns called] Shawire. R. Hisda then said to Rabbah: Go and consider it carefully, for in the evening R. Huna will ask you about it. So he went and examined it, and he found that we learnt, ANY DEED ISSUED BY A COURT OF LAW ONE SHALL RETURN.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra loc cit. for notes. ');">¹</span>

א"ל רב עמרם לרבה היכי פשיט מר איסורא מממונא א"ל תרדא שטרי חליצה ומיאונין תנן

R. Amram then said to Rabbah: How does the Master derive a law relating to a religious prohibition from a civil law?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the sentence quoted from the Mishnah the reference is obviously to documents regarding commercial transactions and similar matters falling within the scope of civil law, while the question of the validity of a divorce is one ultimately affecting a moral or religious issue, and one may not derive one from the other. Cf. Ber. 19b. ');">²</span>

פקע ארזא דבי רב מר אמר משום לתאי דידי פקע ומר אמר משום לתאי דידי פקע:

— [Rabbah] answered him: Idle talker!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H], a person who talks foolishly. Cf. B.K. 105b. ');">³</span>

מצא בחפיסה או בדלוסקמא: מאי חפיסה אמר רבה בר בר חנה חמת קטנה מאי דלוסקמא אמר רבה בר שמואל טליקא דסבי:

The Mishnah taught [this law also] in regard to documents of '<i>halizah</i>' and 'refusal'!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which are matters of religious law, like marriage and divorce. ');">⁴</span>

תכריך של שטרות או אגודה של שטרות וכו': ת"ר כמה הוא תכריך של שטרות שלשה כרוכין זה בזה וכמה היא אגודה של שטרות שלשה קשורין זה בזה

Whereupon the cedar column of the College split in two.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This was regarded as a protest against the incident just described. ');">⁵</span>

שמעת מינה קשר סימן

One<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Amram. ');">⁶</span>

הא תני רבי חייא שלשה כרוכין זה בזה

said: 'It split because of my lot,'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., because of the insulting remark addressed to him by Rabbah. ');">⁷</span>

אי הכי היינו תכריך תכריך כל חד וחד בראשה דחבריה אגודה דרמו אהדדי וכרוכות

and the other<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Rabbah. ');">⁸</span>

מאי מכריז מנין

said: 'It split because of my lot.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because of the way in which R. Amram tried to refute him in public. ');">⁹</span>

מאי אריא תלתא אפילו תרין נמי

IF ONE FINDS [DOCUMENTS] IN A SMALL BAG OR IN A CASE. What is <i>'hafisah'</i>?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The word used in the Mishnah and translated here as 'small bag'. ');">¹⁰</span>

אלא כדאמר רבינא טבעא מכריז הכא נמי שטרי מכריז:

Rabbah b. Bar Hanah said: A small bag. What is '<i>deluskama'</i>?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H] The word used in the Mishnah and translated here as 'a case'. The word is also frequently spelt [H] probably from the [G] = receptacle. ');">¹¹</span>

רשב"ג אומר אחד הלוה משלשה יחזיר ללוה וכו': דאי ס"ד דמלוין נינהו מאי בעו גבי הדדי

Rabbah bar Samuel said: A case used by old people.

דלמא לקיומינהו אזלי דמקיימי

A ROLL OF DOCUMENTS OR A BUNDLE OF DOCUMENTS, etc. Our Rabbis taught: How many documents constitute A ROLL? Three rolled together.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is regarded as a 'distinguishing mark' by which the loser may identify the documents when they are advertised by the finder. The finder would just announce that he had found certain documents, and the person who came forward to claim them would have to state their number and the manner in which they were rolled up. ');">¹²</span>

דלמא מידא דספרא נפיל לא משהי איניש קיומיה בידא דספרא:

And how many constitute A BUNDLE? Three tied together. Will you deduce from this that a knot is a distinguishing mark?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., does the definition of a bundle as 'three fastened together' imply that the fastening, or knot, is regarded as a distinguishing mark. ');">¹³</span>

שלשה שלוו מאחד יחזיר למלוה וכו': דאי ס"ד דלוין נינהו מאי בעו גבי הדדי

— [No] for behold R. Hiyya taught: Three rolled together.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This definition implies the answer to the previous question. As R. Hiyya defined a bundle as 'three rolled together,' without being tied, it follows that the fastening or knot is not essential, and that being rolled together is in itself 'a distinguishing mark'. ');">¹⁴</span>

דלמא למכתבנהו אזלי דכתיבי בתלת ידי ספרי

But if so, this is the same as A ROLL?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Mentioned separately in the Mishnah. ');">¹⁵</span>

ודלמא לקיומינהו אזלי מלוה מקיים שטריה לוה לא מקיים שטריה:

— A ROLL is [made up of documents] placed end to end [and then rolled together]. A BUNDLE is [made up of documents] placed on the top of each other and then rolled together. What does [the finder] announce?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When he advertises the find. ');">¹⁶</span>

אם יש עמהן סמפונות יעשה מה שבסמפונות: אמר רב ירמיה בר אבא אמר רב סמפון היוצא מתחת ידי מלוה אע"פ שכתוב בכתב ידו אינו אלא כמשחק ופסול

— The number [of documents found].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' He mentions the number of documents contained in the roll, and then he can claim the documents by merely stating the way in which they were rolled up. ');">¹⁷</span>

לא מבעיא כתוב בכתב יד סופר דאיכא למימר ספרא אתרמי ליה וכתב אלא אפילו כתוב בכתב ידו פסול סבר דלמא מתרמי ואתי בין השמשות וקא פרע לי דאי לא יהיבנא ליה לא יהיב לי זוזי אכתוב אנא דכי אייתי לי זוזי אתן ליה

Then why [does the Mishnah] mention 'THREE', would not [the same law apply] also to two?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If the loser has not to state the number for the purpose of identification, there is no point in the Mishnah's reference to 'THREE' documents. ');">¹⁸</span>

תנן אם יש עמהן סמפונות יעשה מה שבסמפונות

— But as Rabina says:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Infra 25a. ');">¹⁹</span>

כדאמר רב ספרא שנמצא בין שטרות קרועין הכא נמי שמצאו בין שטרות קרועין

He announces [that he found] coins:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Without stating the number, which the loser has to state for the purpose of identification when he comes to claim the coins. ');">²⁰</span>

ת"ש נמצא לאחד בין שטרותיו שטרו של יוסף בן שמעון פרוע שטרות שניהם פרועין

Here also — he announces [that he found] documents.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Without stating the number, and the loser has to state how many documents there were. The Mishnah therefore says 'THREE' — for if there were only two documents, and the finder used the plural ('documents') in announcing them, which means at least two, the number might be guessed, and could not therefore be regarded as 'a distinguishing mark'. ');">²¹</span>

כדאמר רב ספרא שנמצא בין שטרות קרועין הכא נמי שנמצא בין שטרות קרועין

RABBAN SIMEON B. GAMALIEL SAYS: [IF THEY BELONG TO] ONE PERSON WHO BORROWED FROM THREE, ONE SHALL RETURN [THEM] TO THE BORROWER, etc. For if you were to assume that they belonged to the lenders — how did they [the documents] come to be together? But may not [the lenders] have gone [with them to the Clerk of the Court] to have them endorsed?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And the Clerk may have rolled them together and then lost them. ');">²²</span>

ת"ש שבועה שלא פקדנו אבא ושלא אמר לנו אבא ושלא מצאנו בין שטרותיו של אבא ששטר זה פרוע

— They were [already] endorsed. But may they not have been dropped by the Clerk [who endorsed them]? — people do not leave their endorsed documents with a clerk.

אמר רב ספרא שנמצא בין שטרות קרועין

[IF THEY BELONG TO] THREE PERSONS WHO BORROWED FROM ONE [LENDER] ONE SHALL RETURN THEM TO THE LENDER, etc. For if you were to assume that they belonged to the borrowers<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who received the documents back after paying their debts. ');">²³</span>

ת"ש סמפון שיש עליו עדים יתקיים בחותמיו אימא יתקיים מחותמיו

— how did they [the documents] come to be together? — But may not [the persons mentioned in the documents as borrowers] have gone [to the same Clerk] to have them written?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And the clerk lost them after writing them, so that they were not used at all, and no money was lent. ');">²⁴</span> They were written in three different handwritings. But may not [the borrowers] have gone [with them to the Clerk of the Court] to have them endorsed? — The lender gets his document endorsed, but not the borrower. IF THERE ARE NOTES OF CANCELLATION AMONG THEM ONE MUST ABIDE BY THE CONTENTS OF THE NOTES. R. Jeremiah b. Abba said in the name of Rab: A note of cancellation<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [ [H], from [G], an agreement, then the provision made for the cancellation of a contract under certain conditions.] ');">²⁵</span> that is produced by the lender<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Instead of being produced by the borrower. ');">²⁶</span> even if it is written in his own hand, is to be regarded merely as a prank, and is invalid. [This is so] not only when it is written by a scribe, in which case it may be said that the scribe happened to meet him [the lender] and wrote [the note],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So that the lender might have it ready when the borrower would call to pay and would ask for a receipt. ');">²⁷</span> but even if it is in his own handwriting<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Showing that the lender was himself able to write, and there was no reason why he should have it written before the borrower paid the debt. ');">²⁸</span> it is invalid, [for we assume that he wrote it] thinking, 'The borrower may come at dusk and pay me, and if I do not give him [the note of cancellation] he will not give me the money. I shall write [the note now], so that when he brings me the money I shall give it to him.' [But] we have learned [in the Mishnah]: IF NOTES OF CANCELLATION ARE FOUND AMONG THEM ONE SHALL ABIDE BY THE CONTENTS OF THE NOTES?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And it is obvious that here it is the lender who produces the notes of cancellation, for it is he who found them among the notes of indebtedness in his possession. ');">²⁹</span> — As R. Safra said<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Below in our Gemara. ');">³⁰</span> it was found among torn documents, so here also it was found among torn documents.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [The bill to which the cancellation relates was found intact among torn documents, which shows that the cancellation is genuine, as otherwise the bill would not have been placed among the torn notes of indebtedness.] According to Rashi's second explanation the note of cancellation was found torn among the other torn documents held by the lender, and the fact that it was found among useless documents shows that the borrower just left it with the lender after paying him, and the latter discarded it and put it among his other useless papers. Had the lender written it for the purpose of having it ready when required he would not have put it among his useless papers. ');">³¹</span> Come and hear: If one found among his documents [a note stating] that the note of indebtedness of Joseph b. Simeon was paid, [and there were two debtors bearing that name] the notes of both [debtors] are [deemed to have been paid]?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As each of them can claim to be the person named in the receipt. Cf. B.B. 172a. This proves that a note of cancellation in the possession of the lender is valid. ');">³²</span> — As R. Safra said it was found among torn documents, so here also it was found among torn documents. Come and hear: We swear that our father has not instructed us or said anything to us, and that we have not found [any note] among his documents, to the effect that this note [of indebtedness] has been paid?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Shebu. 45a. This oath has to be taken by orphans who wish to collect debts due to their father. From the text of this oath it appears that if a note of cancellation is found among the lender's documents it is valid, which contradicts the previous teaching that a note of cancellation produced by the lender is invalid. ');">³³</span> R. Safra answered: If it is found among his torn documents.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It is valid if it is found among the lender's torn documents. This is why the orphans have to swear that no such note has been found. ');">³⁴</span> Come and hear: A note of cancellation which bears the signatures of witnesses must be corroborated by the signatories?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Sanh. 31b. This refers to a note of cancellation in possession of the lender, who denies having been paid, as is proved by the fact that he did not surrender it to the lender. The lender is not believed if the witnesses who signed the note testify that they signed it though they are unable to testify whether the debt was paid. Otherwise the lender is believed. This proves in any case that a note of cancellation in the possession of the lender is considered valid. ');">³⁵</span> Say: It must be corroborated through [the evidence of] the signatories: