(Permission is granted to redistribute this material as long as the Kollel
header and the subscription info at the end are included.)

_________________________________________________________________
CHARTS FOR LEARNING THE DAILY DAF

brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Har Nof
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Email - daf@shemayisrael.co.il
_________________________________________________________________

Bava Metzia Chart #4

Bava Metzia Daf 12b-14a

WHAT ARE THE REASONS FOR RETURNING, OR NOT RETURNING, TO THE MALVEH A "SHTAR CHOV" THAT WAS FOUND?
  (A)
SHTAR INCLUDES ACHRAYUS
(The Shtar is NOT returned)		 (B)
DOES NOT INCLUDE ACHRAYUS, ACC. TO R. MEIR
(The Shtar IS returned)		 (C)
DOES NOT INCLUDE ACHRAYUS, ACC. TO RABANAN
(The Shtar is NOT returned)
1) RAV ASI(1)
(the Loveh admits that he owes)		 Perhaps the Loveh wrote the Shtar in Nisan, but did not borrow the money until Tishrei(2) Such a Shtar *cannot* be used to collect from Nechasim Meshu'abadim(3) Such a Shtar *can* be used to collect from Nechasim Meshu'abadim(4)
2) ABAYE(1)
(the Loveh admits that he owes)		 We are concerned that it was repaid, and that the Loveh and Malveh are now conspiring Such a Shtar *cannot* be used to collect from Nechasim Meshu'abadim(3) Such a Shtar *can* be used to collect from Nechasim Meshu'abadim(4)
3) REBBI ELAZAR AND SHMUEL(5)
(the Loveh denies that he owes) 		The Shtar cannot be Mekuyam(6) The Shtar is not valid(7) The Shtar cannot
be Mekuyam(6)
==========
FOOTNOTES:
==========
 (1) Rebbi Yochanan holds either like Rav Asi or like Abaye, who explain that the Mishnah is discussing a case where the Loveh admits that he owes the money. See also Chart #5.
(2) Even though we normally are not concerned for this, as it is forbidden for witnesses to sign a Shtar (which is not a Shtar "Hakna'ah") for the Loveh when he is not going to give it to the Malveh immediately in front of them, nevertheless since this Shtar has been lost there is more reason to suspect that the Shtar is invalid and that it was not given to the Malveh on the date written in it.
(3) Therefore, even if it was written in Nisan and it was not given to the Malveh until Tishrei, and even if the Shtar was already paid, we need not be concerned that the Malveh will unlawfully collect the loan from the Lekuchos.
(4) The Rabanan hold that even a Shtar in which Achrayus was not written is considered like a Shtar in which Achrayus was written ("Achrayus Ta'os Sofer").
(5) Shmuel holds like Rebbi Elazar if we accept (like one option the Gemara suggests on 13a) that Shmuel holds like Abaye -- that the signatures of the witnesses make the Shtar take effect (and cause the property of the Loveh become Meshu'abad to the Malveh) as soon as it is signed. (If Shmuel holds like Rav Asi, who argues with Abaye, then he will explain the Mishnah like Rav Asi explains it, as the Gemara on 13a says.)
(6) Since the Loveh claims that the Shtar is a forgery the Shtar needs Kiyum, but since the Shtar has been lost it we have serious doubts about its validity. Therefore, even if witnesses testify to the authenticity of the signatures written in it we still must be concerned that it was for the Loveh's claim that it was forged perfectly (Rashi DH Shmuel). Consequently, we do not return the Shtar to the Malveh even to use as a bottle-stopper, lest it be forgotten that it fell from him, allowing him to be Mekayem it in Beis Din and collect with it.
(7) According to Rebbi Meir, a Shtar which does not contain Achrayus is invalid entirely. It is returned to the Malveh merely for him to use as a bottle-stopper. (We do not return it to the Loveh, because he himself claims that it is a forgery and does not belong to him.)

Main
Bava Metzia Page		 List of Charts
and Graphics		 Insights
to the Daf
 Background
to the Daf		 Review the Daf
Questions and Answers 		Point by Point
Summary

For questions or sponsorship information, write to daf@shemayisrael.co.il