POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
Prepared by Rabbi P. Feldman
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question on the daf
Previous daf Bava Metzia 13
BAVA METZIA 11-17 - This study material has been produced with the help of
the Israeli ministry of religious affairs.
1) CONCERN FOR FRAUDULENT COLLECTION
(a) Question (Mishnah): We may write a document for the
borrower in the lender's absence;
2) ANOTHER EXPLANATION OF THE MISHNAH
1. Why is this l'Chatchilah - perhaps he will not lend
the money on the date of the document, and he will
improperly take land from people who bought before
(b) Answer #1 (Rav Asi): The Mishnah speaks of Hakna'ah
documents, by which the borrower puts a lien on his land
immediately (so the collection is proper).
1. Question: The Mishnah says, if it has Achrayus, the
finder should not return it; we established this
when Shimon admits that he owes, lest the loan was
given later than the date on the document, and
Reuven will collect illegitimately from property
sold before the loan;
(c) Answer #2 (Abaye): Even by documents that are not
Hakna'ah, when witnesses sign, the lender immediately
acquires (a lien on the borrower's land).
i. If it is a Hakna'ah document, the collection is
2. Answer (Rav Asi): The law is, if it is not a
Hakna'ah document, it should only be written in
front of the lender;
ii. If it is not a Hakna'ah document, it would only
be written in front of the lender, surely the
loan was the same day!
i. Since this document was lost, we are concerned
that it was written (improperly) in the
1. Abaye did not learn as Rav Asi, because of this
question - since documents that are not Hakna'ah are
only written in front of the lender, we should not
be concerned that the money was not given on the
(d) Question (against Abaye - Mishnah): One who finds a Get
of divorce or freedom, a documents of a gift from a dying
man or a receipt, he should not return it, perhaps they
were written and never given.
1. Why should this matter? When witnesses sign, the
lender acquires immediately!
(e) Answer: He only acquires if the document is ultimately
(f) Question: The Mishnah says, if it has Achrayus, we do not
return it; we established this when Shimon admits, lest
the loan was given after the date (and Reuven will
(g) Answer #1 (Rav Asi - above): This is by documents that
are not Hakna'ah.
1. Abaye says that when witnesses sign, the lender
acquires immediately - how can he answer?
(h) Answer #2 (Abaye): We are concerned that the loan was
already repaid; the borrower admits because he is
scheming to help the lender illegitimately collect from
buyers (and share the profit).
(a) Question: Shmuel is not concerned for repayment and
scheming - how can he answer?
(b) Answer #1: If he learns as Rav Asi, he can answer as Rav
1. But if he learns as Abaye, how he can answer?
(c) Answer #2: The Mishnah is when Shimon does not admit.
(d) Question: If so, when there is no Achrayus, why do we
return the document?
1. Granted, Reuven cannot collect from land that Shimon
sold - but he can collect from unsold property!
(e) Answer: Shmuel says (as he said elsewhere) that according
to R. Meir, a document without Achrayus cannot be used to
collect at all.
(f) Question: If it cannot be used for collection, why return
(g) Answer (Rav Noson bar Oshiya): The lender can use the
parchment to plug up a bottle.
(h) Question: Why not return it to the borrower?
(i) Answer: The borrower claims that the lender forged the
3) THE ARGUMENT IN THE MISHNAH
(a) (R. Elazar): The argument in the Mishnah is when Shimon
does not admit; R. Meir says that a document without
Achrayus cannot be used to collect at all, Chachamim hold
that in can be used to collect from unsold property.
1. When Shimon admits, all agree that we return it - we
are not concerned for repayment and scheming.
(b) (R. Yochanan): When Shimon admits, they argue - R. Meir
agrees that a document without Achrayus can be used to
collect from unsold property; Chachamim hold that in can
be used to collect even sold property.
1. When Shimon does not admit, all agree that we do not
return it - we are concerned for repayment.
(c) A Beraisa supports R. Yochanan, refutes R. Elazar in 1
point, and refutes Shmuel in 2 points.
(d) (Beraisa - R. Meir): Levi found a document with Achrayus.
Even though the lender and borrower agree, he may not
return it to either;
1. If the document has no Achrayus - if the borrower
agrees, Levi returns it to the lender; if not, he
may not return it to either.
(e) Question: R. Elazar is refuted on 2 points (above, we
said he is refuted on only 1)!
2. This is because documents with Achrayus can be used
to collect even sold property, documents without
Achrayus can be used to collect from unsold
3. Chachamim say, either can be used to collect even
4. This refutes R. Elazar, who said that R. Meir says
that a document without Achrayus cannot be used to
collect at all;
i. Also - R. Elazar said that neither Tana is
concerned for scheming, but the Beraisa says
that (we do not return a document with
Achrayus, even when both admit, implying that)
we are concerned!
(f) Answer: Both stem from 1 source.
1. Because he says that they argue when Shimon does not
admit, he explained thusly.