משנה: הַמַּלְוֶה אֶת חֲבֵירוֹ בִּשְׁטָר גּוֹבֶה מִנְּכָסִים מְשׁוּעְבָּדִים. עַל יְדֵי עֵדִים גּוֹבֶה מִנְּכָסִים בְּנֵי חוֹרִין. הוֹצִיא עָלָיו כְּתָב יָדוֹ שֶׁהוּא חַייָב לוֹ גּוֹבֶה מִנְּכָסִים בְּנֵי חוֹרִין. עָרָב הַיּוֹצֵא לְאַחַר חִיתּוּם הָעֵדִים גּוֹבֶה מִנְּכָסִים בְּנֵי חוֹרִין. מַעֲשֶׂה בָא לִפְנֵי רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל וְאָמַר גּוֹבֶה מִנְּכָסִים בְּנֵי חוֹרִין. אָמַר לוֹ בֶּן נַנָּס אֵינוֹ גוֹבֶה לֹא מִנְּכָסִים מְשׁוּעְבָּדִים וְלֹא מִנְּכָסִים בְּנֵי חוֹרִין. אָמַר לוֹ לָמָּה. אָמַר לוֹ הֲרֵי הַחוֹנֵק אֶת אֶחָד בַּשּׁוּק וְאָמַר לוֹ הַנַּח וַאֲנִי נוֹתֵן לָךְ פָּטוּר שֶׁלֹּא עַל אֱמוּנָתוֹ הִלְװָהוּ. וְאֵי זֶהוּ עָרָב שֶׁהוּא חַייָב לוֹ אָמַר לוֹ הַלְװֵהוּ וַאֲנִי נוֹתֵן לָךְ חַייָב שֶׁכֵּן עַל אֱמוּנָתוֹ הִלְװָהוּ. אָמַר רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל הָרוֹצֶה שֶׁיִּתְחַכֵּם יַעֲסוֹק בְּדִינֵי מָמוֹנוֹת שֶׁאֵין לָךְ מִקְצוֹעַ בַּתּוֹרָה גָּדוֹל מֵהֶן שֶׁהֵן כְּמַעְייָן הַנּוֹבֵעַ וְכָל־הָרוֹצֶה שֶׁיַּעֲסוֹק בְּדִינֵי מָמוֹנוֹת יְשַׁמֵּשׁ אֶת שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן נַנָּס. MISHNAH: Somebody who lent to another by a document collects from encumbered property114Unless otherwise noted in the contract, a secured loan is a mortgage on any real estate in the possession of the debtor at the moment the bond was executed. A sale by the debtor does not remove the creditor’s lien. The creditor may foreclose from the buyer if no other property be left in the debtor’s hand; the buyer is then left to try to get his money back from the debtor., by witnesses collects from free property115Since an oral loan before witnesses is a private transaction, it cannot be detected by a prospective buyer. Such a loan can only be used to forclose the debtor’s unencumbered property. These are called “free properties”.. If he presents a note in his own handwriting that he owes him116An IOU can be collected in court but in the absence of witnesses’ signatures only from the debtor’s actual property., he collects from free property. From a guarantor who endorsed after the signature of the witnesses117If the guarantor endorsed the bond by a note below the witnesses’ signatures that he would guarantee payment, he executed an IOU, not a witnessed document., one collects from free property. This case came before Rebbi Ismael who said, he collects from free property.
Ben Nannas said to him131This is a direct continuation of Mishnah 16; in the independent Mishnah mss. they form one Mishnah together., he collects neither from encumbered nor from free property. He asked, why? He answered, if one would strangle another in the market place132A creditor tries to force the debtor to pay his debt by using physical force. and a third person would say, let him go, I shall pay you, he is not liable since the loan was not made on his faith133The use of “faith” for “credit worthiness” goes back to Latin fides.. Who is the guarantor who is liable? If he told him, “lend to him and I shall pay you,” he is liable because the loan was extended on his faith. Rebbi Ismael said, anybody who wants to train to become wise should study the laws of money matters since nothing greater is there in the Torah; they are like a flowing source, and anybody wanting to study the laws of money matters should serve Simeon ben Nannas.
הלכה: הַמַּלְוֶה אֶת חֲבֵירוֹ בִּשְׁטָר כול׳. רַב הוּנָא אָמַר. הַקְדָּמָה פְסוּלָה וְהַשְּׁטָר כָּשֵׁר. וְהָתַנִּינָן. פְּרוֹזְבּוֹל הַמּוּקְדָּם כָּשֵׁר וְהַמְאוּחָר פָּסוּל. הָדָא דַתָּ מַר. דְּרַב הוּנָה רִבִּי לָֽעְזָר וְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יָקִים. הָדָא דְרַב הוּנָא רִבִּי לָֽעְזָר. אָמַר. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין עָלָיו עֵדִים אֶלָּא שֶׁנְּתָנוֹ לָהּ בִּפְנֵי עֵדִים כָּשֵׁר וְגוֹבָה מִנְּכָסִים מְשׁוּעְבָּדִין. שֶׁאֵין הָעֵדִים חוֹתְמִין עַל הַגֵּט אֶלָּא מִפְּנֵי תִיקּוּן הָעוֹלָם. וְהֵיכִי. אִם בְּאוֹתָן שֶׁהִכְחִישׁוּ עֵדוּתָן. הִכְחִישׁ עֵדוּתָן כְּמִי שֶׁאֵינָהּ וְהַשְּׁטָר כָּשֵׁר. אִם בְּאוֹתָן שֶׁלֹּא הִכְחִישׁוּ עֵדוּתָן. אָֽמְרָת. הָא אָמַר רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ. עָשׂוּ הָעֵדִים הַחֲתוּמִין בַּשְּׁטָר כְּמִי שֶׁנֶּחְקְרָה עֵדוּתָן בְּבֵית דִּין. מַאי כְדוֹן. בְּאִינּוּן דָּֽמְרִין כֵּן. אֲנִי פְלוֹנִי בֵּן פְּלוֹנִי לָװִיתִי מִפְּלוֹנִי וּפְלוֹנִי עָרֵב. HALAKHAH: “Somebody who lent to another by a document,” etc. Rav Huna said, predating is invalid but the document is valid118A predated document can be made whole by testimony about the exact time it was signed. Then it can serve as basis for foreclosure procedures based on the oral testimony.. But did we not state: “A predated prozbol118*Ševi'it 10:3, Note 80. is valid, postdated it is invalid”?119Mishnah Ševi‘it 10:5. The question is not asked about this sentence, but about the following one: Predated documents of indebtedness are invalid, postdated they are valid. In the Halakhah there (Notes 98–99), R. Joḥanan holds that a predated bond is totally invalid; R. Simeon ben Laqish holds that it only counts from the time of signing, parallel to Rav Huna’s opinion here. As explained in Note 114 (Sheviit 10:1:1" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Sheviit.10.1.1">Ševi‘it 10:1 Note 2), a bond creates a mortgage lien on behalf of the creditor which is not removed by sale of the property. A predated document may create a false lien; this makes it invalid. That means, Rav Huna, Rebbi Eleazar, and Rebbi Simeon ben Yaqim120Probably one should read instead “R. Simeon ben Laqish”, R. Simeon ben Yaqim’s teacher.. Rav Huna, quoted here. 121Gittin 9:5" href="/Mishnah_Gittin.9.5">Mishnah Giṭṭin 9:5 (Notes 69–71).“Rebbi Eleazar122R. Eleazar ben Shamua‘, the Tanna. said, it123A bill of divorce. is valid even if there are no signatures of witnesses on it if only he delivered it in the presence of witnesses; and she can use it to collect from encumbered property. For the witnesses sign on the bill of divorce only for the public good.” How? If about those who denied their testimony124If the witnesses claim that their signatures were forged, there is no document. Rav Huna cannot declare it valid., the denied testimony is as if nonexistent, and the document should be valid? If about those who did not deny their testimony, did not Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish say125Sheviit 10:3:3" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Sheviit.10.3.3">Ševi‘it 10:5 Note 96, Ketubot 2:3:2" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Ketubot.2.3.2">Ketubot 2:3 Note 56, Gittin 4:2:6" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Gittin.4.2.6">Giṭṭin 4:2 Note 46; Ketubot.18b">Babli Ketubot 18b, Gittin.3a">Giṭṭin 3a., that they considered witnesses who signed a document as if their testimony had been cross-examined in court126A witness, once he has testified in court, may not change his story (Bikkurim 3:4:5" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Bikkurim.3.4.5">Bikkurim 3:5 Note 72, Sanhedrin.44b">Babli Sanhedrin44b). Therefore the witnesses are not admitted to claim that they did not know the bond was predated.? What about it: As one formulates, “I, X ben Y, am taking a loan from you, Z, and U is guarantor.”127A bond signed by the debtor witout any witnesses.
רַב אָמַר. צָרִיךְ לְהַזְכִּיר זְמַנוֹ שֶׁלְּרִאשׁוֹן בַּשֵּׁינִי. וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר. אֵין צָרִיךְ לְהַזְכִּיר זְמַנוֹ שֶׁלְּרִאשׁוֹן בַּשֵּׁינִי. רַב וּשְׁמוּאֵל. רַב כְּרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן וּשְׁמוּאֵל כְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ. 128This is from Halakhah 12 (Mishnah 10, Notes 90–92). Rav said, one has to mention the earlier date in the second document. But Samuel said, one does not have to mention the earlier date in the second document. Rav and Samuel, Rav parallels Rebbi Joḥanan129Rav holds with R. Joḥanan (Note 119) that a predated bond is absolutely invalid. Therefore, a replacement for a bond which partially became invalid must be executed by a court which is empowered to make the copy retroactively valid to the time of the original as determined by testimony. and Samuel parallels Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish130Samuel holds with R. Simeon ben Laqish that a predated bond is valid from the time of signing. Therefore, the replacement can be executed by the witnesses but cannot be made valid from a time before the actual signing of the replacement..
אָמַר לוֹ בֶּן נַנָּס כול׳. רִבִּי יָסָא בְשֵם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁקִּילְּסוֹ רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אֶת בֶּן נַנָּס עַל מִדְרָשׁוֹ קִילְּסוֹ. אֲבָל אֵינָהּ כְּבֶן נַנָּס. שִׁמְעוֹן בַּר װָה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. אַף בְּחָנוּק הֲלָכָה כְּרִבִּי [יִשְׁמָעֵאל]. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. וְאַתְּ שְׁמַע מִינָּהּ. בַּר נַשׁ דַּהֲוָה צַייָד לְחַבְרֵיהּ בַּשׁוּקָא. אֲתַא חַד וָמַר. שָֽׁבְקֵיהּ וָנָא יְהַב. מִן אָהֵן גְּבַיי וּמִן אָהֵן לָא גְבַיי. “Ben Nannas said to him,” etc. Rebbi Yasa in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Even though Rebbi Ismael praised Ben Nannas, he praised him only for his argument. But [practice] does not follow Ben Nannas135Babli 176a.. Simeon bar Abba in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Also in the case of the strangled person practice follows Rebbi Ismael136The Babli, loc. cit., holds that in such a case a simple statement does not make the third person a guarantor; any guaranty given after the signing of the bond needs an act of acquisition by the creditor. It seems that R. Yose in the following sentence states the same; even for R. Ismael the intervening person does not become a guarantor by simple speech.. Rebbi Yose said, one infers from here that a person who caught another in the market place, when a third person came and said, let him go and I shall give, collects from the one but does not collect from the other.