## Bava Metzia Daf 20a

###### Bava Metzia 20a:1
[Bava Metzia 20a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/20a:1)

שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ: אִיתַאּ לְדִשְׁמוּאֵל, דְּאָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: הַמּוֹכֵר שְׁטַר חוֹב לַחֲבֵירוֹ, וְחָזַר וּמְחָלוֹ – מָחוּל, וַאֲפִילּוּ יוֹרֵשׁ מוֹחֵל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Conclude from** the fact that this suspicion is not taken into account that the *halakha* **of Shmuel is accepted. As Shmuel says:** In the case of **one who sells a promissory note to another, and** the seller **then forgives** the debt of the debtor, **it is forgiven,** since the debtor essentially had a non-transferable obligation to the creditor alone, **and even** the creditor’s **heir can forgive** the debt. Therefore, if the wife did engage in the deception mentioned above, it was within her rights, as she is able to forgive the debt of the marriage contract.


###### Bava Metzia 20a:2
[Bava Metzia 20a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/20a:2)

אַבָּיֵי אָמַר: אֲפִילּוּ תֵּימָא לֵיתַיהּ לְדִשְׁמוּאֵל, הָכָא בְּמַאי עָסְקִינַן – בְּשֶׁשְּׁטַר כְּתוּבָּה יוֹצֵא מִתַּחַת יָדָהּ. וְרָבָא אָמַר: אִי מִשּׁוּם שְׁטַר כְּתוּבָּה, חָיְישִׁינַן לִשְׁתֵּי כְתוּבּוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye said:** This is not conclusive proof. **Even** if **you say** that the *halakha* **of Shmuel is not** accepted, **here we are dealing with** a case **where** the **marriage contract emerges from her possession,** which indicates that she did not sell it. **And Rava** disagreed with Abaye and **said: If** the reason there is no suspicion that she sold her marriage contract is **due to** the fact that the **marriage contract** emerged from her possession, this reason is insufficient, as **we** should **suspect** that there might be **two marriage contracts.**


###### Bava Metzia 20a:3
[Bava Metzia 20a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/20a:3)

וְאַבָּיֵי אָמַר, חֲדָא: לִשְׁתֵּי כְתוּבּוֹת לָא חָיְישִׁינַן. וְעוֹד, שׁוֹבָר בִּזְמַנּוֹ טָרֵיף. אַבָּיֵי לְטַעְמֵיהּ, דְּאָמַר: עֵדָיו בַּחֲתוּמָיו זָכִין לוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Abaye said** in response: **First, we are not concerned about** the remote possibility of **two marriage contracts. And furthermore,** even if there is only one marriage contract, which was sold before the receipt was given to the husband, the receipt is valid, as **a receipt** can be used to **repossess** property **from** the **time** it was written, even if it was given on a later date. In saying this, **Abaye** conforms **to his** standard line of **reasoning, as he says** that once a monetary document is written for someone, **the document’s witnesses, with their signatures, acquire** it **on his behalf.**


###### Bava Metzia 20a:4
[Bava Metzia 20a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/20a:4)

**מַתְנִי׳** מָצָא אִיגְּרוֹת שׁוּם וְאִיגְּרוֹת מָזוֹן, שְׁטָרֵי חֲלִיצָה וּמֵיאוּנִין, וּשְׁטָרֵי בֵירוּרִין, וְכׇל מַעֲשֵׂה בֵּית דִּין – הֲרֵי זֶה יַחְזִיר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** If one **found documents of appraisal** of a debtor’s property for the purpose of debt collection; **or documents concerning food,** which were drawn up when one accepted upon himself to provide sustenance for another; **documents of *ḥalitza*; or** documents of **refusal** of a girl upon reaching majority to remain married to the man to whom her mother or brothers married her as a minor after the death of her father; **or documents of *beirurin*,** a concept that will be explained in the Gemara; **or any court enactment,** e.g., a promissory note that has been authenticated by the court, in all of these cases, the finder **must return** the document to its presumed owner.


###### Bava Metzia 20a:5
[Bava Metzia 20a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/20a:5)

מָצָא בַּחֲפִיסָה אוֹ בִדְלוֹסְקָמָא, תַּכְרִיךְ שֶׁל שְׁטָרוֹת אוֹ אֲגוּדָּה שֶׁל שְׁטָרוֹת – הֲרֵי זֶה יַחְזִיר. וְכַמָּה אֲגוּדָּה שֶׁל שְׁטָרוֹת – שְׁלֹשָׁה קְשׁוּרִין זֶה בָּזֶה. רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר: אֶחָד הַלֹּוֶה מִשְּׁלֹשָׁה – יַחְזִיר לַלֹּוֶה. שְׁלֹשָׁה הַלֹּוִין מִן הָאֶחָד – יַחְזִיר לַמַּלְוֶה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If one **found** documents **in a *ḥafisa* or in a *deluskema*,** both of them types of containers, or if he found **a roll of documents or a bundle of documents, he must return** them. **And how many** documents are considered to be **a bundle of documents?** It is **three** that are **tied together. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says:** If the documents make reference to loans of **one** person **who borrowed** money **from three** people, the finder **must return** them **to the debtor,** as they were presumably in his possession before being lost. If the documents make reference to loans of **three** people **who borrowed** money **from one** person, **he must return** them **to the creditor,** as they were presumably in his possession before being lost.


###### Bava Metzia 20a:6
[Bava Metzia 20a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/20a:6)

מָצָא שְׁטָר בֵּין שְׁטָרוֹתָיו וְאֵינוֹ יוֹדֵעַ מָה טִיבוֹ – יְהֵא מוּנָּח עַד שֶׁיָּבוֹא אֵלִיָּהוּ. אִם יֵשׁ עִמָּהֶן סִמְפּוֹנוֹת, יַעֲשֶׂה מָה שֶׁבַּסִּמְפּוֹנוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If one **found a document among his documents** that were given to him by other people as a trustee, **and he does not know what its nature is,** i.e., he does not remember who gave it to him or whether the debt mentioned in it has been paid, the document **is placed** aside **until Elijah** the prophet **comes** and clarifies the issue through his prophecy. **If there are cancellations of contracts [*simponot*] among them, he should do what** is stated **in the *simponot*.**


###### Bava Metzia 20a:7
[Bava Metzia 20a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/20a:7)

**גְּמָ׳** מַאי ״שְׁטָרֵי בֵירוּרִין״? הָכָא תַּרְגִּמוּ שְׁטָרֵי טַעֲנָתָא. רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה אָמַר: זֶה בּוֹרֵר לוֹ אֶחָד וְזֶה בּוֹרֵר לוֹ אֶחָד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** **What** is meant by **documents of *beirurin*? Here,** in Babylonia, the Sages **interpret** it to mean **documents** recording each litigant’s clarification [*beirur*] **of** his **claims** in a court case. **Rabbi Yirmeya,** who lived in Eretz Yisrael, **said:** It is referring to cases where **this** litigant **chooses [*borer*] one** judge, **and that** litigant **chooses one** judge, and they choose the third judge for the case. The two litigants sign a document in which they declare which judges they choose.


###### Bava Metzia 20a:8
[Bava Metzia 20a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/20a:8)

וְכׇל מַעֲשֵׂה בֵּית דִּין הֲרֵי זֶה יַחְזִיר. הָהוּא גִּיטָּא דְּאִשְׁתְּכַח בֵּי דִינָא דְּרַב הוּנָא, דַּהֲוָה כְּתִיב בֵּיהּ ״בִּשְׁוִירֵי מָתָא דְּעַל רָכִיס נַהֲרָא״. אֲמַר רַב הוּנָא:

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara addresses that which the mishna states: **And** with regard to **any court enactment,** the one who found it **must return** it to its presumed owner. The Gemara relates: There was **a certain bill of divorce that was found** in **the court of Rav Huna, in which it was written** that the bill of divorce was written **in Sheviri City, which is** located **on the Rakhis River. Rav Huna said** about this: