If one found writs of assessment, [beth-din having assessed the property of the debtor for the creditor towards payment of the debt], writs of sustenance, [wherein the husband takes it upon himself to feed his wife's daughter. Another interpretation: (writs wherein it is stated that land of the husband is to be sold to feed his wife and daughters], writs of refusal, [wherein it is written: "Before us this and this woman refused (to remain married to) this and this man," this, in an instance of an (orphaned) minor whose mother and brothers married her off, in which instance she does not require a get], writs of selection, [one (litigant) choosing one (judge) and the other choosing one, to judge their case], and (any writ of) enactment by beth-din, he returns them (to the ones for whom they were written). If he found (bills) in a chafisah [a small leather bag], or in a dluskema [a leather bag where the elderly keep their necessaries so as not to have to search for them], or a pack of bills [three or more, folded together], or a bundle of bills [lying one atop the other, length to length], he returns them, [this being a thing that has a siman (an identifying sign). For the receptacle is a siman, the owner saying: "In such and such a receptacle did I place them." Likewise, "pack" and "bundle" are a siman.] And how many are a "bundle" of bills? Three tied together. R. Shimon b. Gamliel says: If one borrowed from three, they are returned to the debtor. [If the three bills are of one debtor, who borrowed from three different men, the finder returns them to the debtor, the bills definitely having fallen from him. For if they had fallen from them (the creditors), who would have gathered them together in one place? And this, only with bills that have been certified in beth-din. But with bills that have not been certified, we fear that the three creditors might have taken them to the scribe of beth-din to have them certified and they fell from the hand of the scribe. But it is not to be feared that they fell from the scribe's hand after he certified them, for men do not leave certified bills in the hand of the scribe.] If three borrowed from one, he returns it to the creditor, [it being obvious that they fell from him. And if they were all written by the hand of one scribe, we fear that they might have fallen from the hand of the scribe and that the loan had never been made, so that they are not returned.] If he found a bill among his bills, and he does not know the nature of it [i.e., whether the debtor deposited it with him or the creditor, or whether it is partially paid and it was given to him to act as an intermediary], it remains [in his hand without being returned to either] until Eliyahu arrives. If he finds among them (his bills) a receipt [written for one of his bills], he does what is (stated) in the receipt, [and the bill is assumed to have been paid. And even though this receipt should have been in the hand of the debtor and not in that of the creditor, we assume that the debtor trusted the creditor and said: "Give it to me tomorrow," and he forgot. (This, when the creditor found the bill for which the receipt was written among torn-up bills, though it itself is not torn up)].
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Metzia
אגרות שום – that the Jewish court estimated the [value of the] property of the borrower to the creditor in his loan document
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Metzia
If a man found letters of evaluation, or letters of sustenance, or documents of halitzah or refusal, or documents of arbitration or any document drawn out by the court he should return them. The documents listed in this section are all executed by a court. In such a case we need not fear that the court wrote the document and then did not fulfill what was stated in it, as we feared with regards to the documents mentioned in the previous mishnah. Therefore they can be returned to those named in the documents. A “letter of evaluation” is an evaluation of a person’s property should it need to be sold to pay off his debts. A “letter of sustenance” is permission given to a wife to sell her husband’s property should he not properly provide her with food (or other financial obligations). “Documents of halitzah” are documents that testify to a man’s having declared that he will not perform the levirate marriage (see Deuteronomy 25:5-10). “Documents of refusal” are documents that testify that a woman whose mother or brother (but not father) arranged her marriage when she was a minor refused the marriage when she became an adult. In such a case the woman does not need a regular divorce document, a get. “Documents of arbitration” are documents that state the litigants choices for judges.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Metzia
ואגרות מזון – that he accepted upon himself to feed the daughter of his wife. Another explanation: that they would sell from the landed property of the husband to support the wife and the daughters.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Metzia
If he found documents in a satchel or bag, or a bundle of documents he should return them. How many count as a bundle of documents? Three tied up together. If a person finds documents in an identifiable bag he should return them to the person who can identify the bag. In the upcoming chapter we will learn about identifying lost objects.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Metzia
ומיאונין – that they would write in the document: “In our presence, so-and-so has refused this particular gentleman as her husband.” And this is regarding when a minor whose mother and/or brothers married her off, she does not require a Jewish bill of divorce.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Metzia
Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says: [If one found three documents in which] one borrowed from three others, they should be returned to the borrower. But if [one found three documents in which] one loaned to three, they should be returned to the lender. A set of three documents found together and all containing one name, was in all likelihood lost by that named person. Therefore if three documents state that one person borrowed from three others, it is reasonable that they belonged to the borrower. If the three documents all contain the name of the same creditor who loaned to three different debtors, it is reasonable that the documents belonged to the creditor.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Metzia
שטרי בירורין – this one chooses one [judge] and the other party chooses one [judge] who will adjudicate for them.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Metzia
If a man found a document among his documents and he does not know what is its nature, it must be left until Elijah comes. If a person finds a document amongst his documents that contains the name of a creditor and a debtor, but he doesn’t know who gave him the document, and therefore he doesn’t know if it was paid off, he should hold the document until Elijah comes. In other words he shouldn’t get rid of the document but neither is he permitted to give it to either the creditor or the debtor.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Metzia
מצא – [he found] documents.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Metzia
If there were postscripts amongst them, he should do what is stated in the postscript. If he finds amongst his documents torn or unreadable documents which have with them postscripts which state what needs to be done with the document, he should do what is in the postscript, even though the document itself is torn or unreadable.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Metzia
בחפיסה – a small leather bag
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Metzia
Questions for Further Thought: Mishnah eight, section two: Why in this case is the finder supposed to return the lost documents? Why don’t we worry that they were lost by the writer who changed his mind after writing them and before giving them?
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Metzia
ודלוסקמא – a leather utensil/box that the elderly hide their utensils so that they don’t have to search after them.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Metzia
ותכריך של שטרות – three documents or more which are wrapped up one with the other.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Metzia
ואגודה – that are lying one on top of the other, the length of this one on the length of that one.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Metzia
הרי זה יחזיר – since it is something that has a sign; for the utensil is sign when the owners say, “in this particular utensil you found them.”
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Metzia
אחד הלוה משלשה – if there are three [loan] documents of one borrower who borrowed from three [different] people, the finder [of these lost documents] should be returned to the borrower, since they had surely fallen from his hand, for if they had fallen from their hands (i.e., the three lenders), who gathered them to one place? And specifically when the documents were authenticated by the Jewish court. But if they were not authenticated, we suspect that perhaps, in order to authenticate them, the three lenders brought them to the scribe of the judges and they fell from the hand of the scribe. And we should not suspect lest after they had been authenticated, they fell from the hand of the scribe, for a person does not delay their confirmation in the hand of the scribe. And if they (i.e., the loan documents) are from three [different] borrowers, who borrowed from one individual, the finder should return them to the lender for the matter is known that they fell from him. And if all three of them were in the writing of one scribe, we suspect lest they fell from the hand of the scribe and they were not [ever] loaned. And therefore, we do not return them.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Metzia
מצא שטר בין שטרותיו ואינו יודע מה טיבו – with him – if the borrower deposited it with him or the lender, or lest it was partially paid-off, and they delivered it to him to be the intermediary between them (i.e., the lender and the borrower).
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Metzia
יהא מונח – in his hand, and he should not return it to either this one or the other one.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Metzia
ואם יש עמהן סמפון – [codicil]. The one who finds it amongst his documents a receipt that was written on one of his documents.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Metzia
יעשה מה שבסמפון – And the [loan] document was under the presumption of having been paid-off, and even though it would have been appropriate for this receipt to have been placed in the hand of the borrower and not in the hand of the lender/creditor, we say that the borrower trusted the lender and said: “tomorrow give it [the receipt] to me,” and he forgot. And this is the case of when a lender found this document upon which was written the receipt, between his torn documents even though it was not torn.
