## Bava Batra Daf 70b

###### Bava Batra 70b:1
[Bava Batra 70b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/70b:1)

סוֹף סוֹף, כִּי אָמַר לֵיהּ ״נֶאֶנְסוּ״, לָאו שְׁבוּעָה בָּעֵי? הָכָא נָמֵי, מַאי ״נֶאֱמָן״ – נֶאֱמָן בִּשְׁבוּעָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Ultimately,** even **when** the bailee **says to** the depositor that the items were **taken** from him **under circumstances beyond his control, is he not required to take an oath?** How, then, can you assert that he is deemed credible to claim that he returned the items without taking an oath? Rav Ḥisda said to him: **Here too, what** did I mean when I said that he is **deemed credible?** It means that **he is deemed credible when** he takes **an oath.**


###### Bava Batra 70b:2
[Bava Batra 70b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/70b:2)

לֵימָא בִּפְלוּגְתָּא דְּהָנֵי תַּנָּאֵי – דְּתַנְיָא: שְׁטַר כִּיס הַיּוֹצֵא עַל הַיְּתוֹמִים – דַּיָּינֵי גוֹלָה אָמְרִי: נִשְׁבָּע וְגוֹבֶה כּוּלּוֹ. וְדַיָּינֵי אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל אָמְרִי: נִשְׁבָּע וְגוֹבֶה מֶחֱצָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **Let us say** that Rav Amram and Rav Ḥisda disagree **with regard to** the issue that is the subject of **the dispute between these *tanna’im*, as** a *halakha* **is taught** in a *baraita* with regard to **a purse document,** i.e., a document that records an arrangement whereby one gives another money as an investment in a joint venture on condition that the profits will be divided equally between the two parties. If the person who received the money died, and this document **was presented** by the lender **against the orphans, the judges of the exile say** that the lender **takes an oath** that the money had never been returned to him, **and** he **collects the entire** sum. **And the judges of Eretz Yisrael say** that he **takes an oath and collects** only **half** of the sum.


###### Bava Batra 70b:3
[Bava Batra 70b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/70b:3)

וּדְכוּלֵּי עָלְמָא אִית לְהוּ דִּנְהַרְדָּעֵי – דְּאָמְרִי נְהַרְדָּעֵי: הַאי עִיסְקָא – פַּלְגָא מִלְוֶה, וּפַלְגָא פִּקָּדוֹן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** it is understood **that everyone agrees with** the opinion of the Sages **of Neharde’a, as** the Sages **of Neharde’a say:** With regard to **this joint venture,** whereby one person gives money to another on condition that it will be used for business purposes and that the profits will be divided equally between the two parties, **half** of the invested money is considered **a loan,** for which the borrower is exclusively liable, **and half** is considered **a deposit,** so that if it is lost under circumstances beyond his control, the borrower is exempt from the liability to return it.


###### Bava Batra 70b:4
[Bava Batra 70b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/70b:4)

מַאי, לָאו בְּהָא קָא מִיפַּלְגִי – דְּמָר סָבַר, מָצֵי אֲמַר לֵיהּ: ״שְׁטָרָךְ בִּידִי מַאי בָּעֵי״; וּמָר סָבַר, לָא אָמְרִי?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
According to this assumption, everyone agrees that the claimant can recover from the orphans by means of an oath the half of the money that is considered a loan, just as he would have been able to demand that money from their father. Concerning the half that is considered a deposit, **what, is it not with regard to this** point that **they disagree, as** one **Sage,** the judges of the exile, **holds** like Rav Amram **that** the depositor **can say to** the bailee: **What is your document doing in my possession?** Therefore, neither the father nor his children are deemed credible to claim that they had returned the half that is considered a deposit, and the investor can collect that half as well. **And** one **Sage,** the judges of Eretz Yisrael, **holds** like Rav Ḥisda, that one **cannot assert** this claim, and therefore the investor can collect only the half that is considered a loan. But as for the half that is considered a deposit, the father would have been deemed credible in his claim that he had already returned it.


###### Bava Batra 70b:5
[Bava Batra 70b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/70b:5)

לָא; דְּכוּלֵּי עָלְמָא אִית לְהוּ דְּרַב חִסְדָּא; וְהָכָא בְּהָא קָמִיפַּלְגִי – דְּמָר סָבַר: אִם אִיתָא דְּפַרְעֵיהּ, מֵימָר הֲוָה אָמַר. וּמָר סָבַר: אֵימוֹר מַלְאַךְ הַמָּוֶת הוּא דְּאַנְסֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this opinion: **No, everyone,** i.e., both the judges of the exile and the judges of Eretz Yisrael, **agrees with** the opinion **of Rav Ḥisda,** that the father can claim that he returned the money. **And here, they disagree about** the following issue, **as** one **Sage,** the judges of the exile, **holds** that **if it is so** that he had in fact **repaid** the money, **he would have told** his children that he repaid it. Since he did not tell them, it may be assumed that he never repaid the money. **And** one **Sage,** the judges of Eretz Yisrael, **holds** that you can **say** that **it was the Angel of Death that prevented him** from doing so, meaning he died before he had the opportunity to give his children a detailed report concerning his financial affairs.


###### Bava Batra 70b:6
[Bava Batra 70b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/70b:6)

שְׁלַח רַב הוּנָא בַּר אָבִין: הַמַּפְקִיד אֵצֶל חֲבֵירוֹ בִּשְׁטָר, וְאָמַר לוֹ: ״הֶחְזַרְתִּיו לָךְ״ – נֶאֱמָן. וּשְׁטַר כִּיס הַיּוֹצֵא עַל הַיְּתוֹמִין – נִשְׁבָּע וְגוֹבֶה כּוּלּוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Apropos this discussion, it is related that **Rav Huna bar Avin sent** the following ruling: If one **deposits** an item **with another** and receives **a document** attesting to the deposit, **and** the bailee later **says to him: I returned** the item **to you,** the bailee is **deemed credible** even if the document is still in the hands of the depositor. **And** with regard to **a purse document** attesting to a joint venture **that was presented** by the lender to support his claim **against the** borrower’s **orphans,** the lender **takes an oath** that the money had never been returned to him **and collects the entire** sum from the orphans.


###### Bava Batra 70b:7
[Bava Batra 70b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/70b:7)

תַּרְתֵּי?! שָׁאנֵי הָתָם, דְּאִם אִיתָא דְּפַרְעֵיהּ – מֵימָר הֲוָה אָמַר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: Don’t these **two** *halakhot* contradict each other? If the father is deemed credible when he claims that he repaid a loan, the court should present this claim on behalf of his orphans. The Gemara answers: **It is different there, as if it is so** that the father had, in fact, **repaid** the money, **he would have told** his children that he repaid it. Since he did not tell them anything about it, it may be assumed that he never repaid the money.


###### Bava Batra 70b:8
[Bava Batra 70b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/70b:8)

רָבָא אָמַר: הִלְכְתָא – נִשְׁבָּע וְגוֹבֶה מֶחֱצָה. אָמַר מָר זוּטְרָא: הִלְכְתָא כְּדַיָּינֵי גוֹלָה. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רָבִינָא לְמָר זוּטְרָא, הָא אָמַר רָבָא: נִשְׁבָּע וְגוֹבֶה מֶחֱצָה! אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אֲנַן, דְּדַיָּינֵי גוֹלָה

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said:** With regard to the case of a purse document that was presented to support a claim against orphans, **the *halakha*** is that the claimant **takes an oath** that the money had never been returned to him **and** then **collects half** of the sum recorded in the document, in accordance with the judges of Eretz Yisrael. The Gemara relates that two generations later, **Mar Zutra said: The *halakha*** is **in accordance with** the opinion of **the judges of the exile. Ravina said to Mar Zutra: Didn’t Rava say** that the claimant **takes an oath and collects half** of the sum? Mar Zutra **said to him:** With regard to the opinion **of the judges of the exile, we**