Ploni owed money to Yeimar bar Chashu. Ploni died and left a boat. Yeimar sent a Shali'ach to seize it for him; the Shali'ach did so. Rav Papa and Rav Huna brei d'Rav Yehoshua (who were also creditors of Ploni) saw him.

Rav Papa and Rav Huna: You seize for a creditor in a case where it harms others (e.g. other creditors such as ourselves). R. Yochanan says that such seizure is invalid.

Rav Papa and Rav Huna seized the boat. Rav Papa conducted it with oars; Rav Huna led it by the ropes. Each said that he acquired it himself.

Rav Pinchas bar Ami: Rav and Shmuel say that seizure helps only in a Reshus ha'Rabim!

Rav Papa and Rav Huna: We seized the boat in the middle of the river, which is like a Reshus ha'Rabim.

Rava: You are stealing! Rav Nachman ruled that seizure works only in the borrower's lifetime!

Avimi the son of R. Avahu owed money. He sent Chama the son of Rabah bar Avahu to pay it. After paying, he asked for the document. The creditors refused, saying that they took the money for a different loan for which there was no document.

R. Avahu (to Chama): Do you have witnesses who saw you pay?

Chama: No.

R. Avahu: If so, since they could say that you didn't pay, they are believed to say they took payment for a loan without a document.

Question: Must the Shali'ach suffer the loss?

Answer (Rav Ashi): If he was told 'take the document and give the money', he suffers the loss. If he was told 'give the money and take the document', he is exempt.

Rejection: No, in either case, he suffers the loss.

The borrower tells him 'I sent you to help me, not to mess me up'!

A man had deposited documents with a woman to whom he owed money. After his death, his heirs requested the documents.

The woman: I seized them when he was alive, to be collateral for my debt.

Rav Nachman: Do you have witnesses that he asked for his documents, and you refused to return them?

The woman: No.

Rav Nachman: If so, this is considered seizure after death, and it does not help. (Even though she had them during his lifetime, she was watching them for him. Seizure helps only if he was about to die, and it was taken for the sake of collection.)

Rava judged a case, and ruled that the defendant must swear.

Rava's wife: I know that she is suspected to swear falsely!

Rava changed his ruling, and said that the claimant must swear.

Rava judged a case involving a document. Rav Papa told Rava that he knew that the document had been paid.

Rava: Do you have someone else who knows this?

Rav Papa: No.

Rava: If so, you are only one witness. Your testimony does not help.

Rav Ada bar Masnah: Is Rav Papa less credible than your wife?!

Rava: I am certain that my wife would not lie. I am not certain about Rav Papa.

Rav Papa: Since you say that a judge may rely on someone whom he knows does not lie, I would tear a document on the word of someone like my son Aba Mar.

Question: Can that really be?!

Correction: Rather, I would not allow one to collect with it (Tosfos - without swearing).

Rav Bivi bar Abaye ruled that a certain woman must swear to avoid paying. The claimant requested that she swear in her home city, for perhaps she would be ashamed to swear falsely there.

The woman: First write a document saying that I swore and was acquitted, and they will give it to me after I swear.

Rav Bivi: Write it for her.

Objection (Rav Papi): Rava said that if a validation (of a document) was written before the witnesses affirmed the signatures, it is invalid!

A matter that appears false is invalid. The same applies here (we cannot write that she swore, before she swears)!

Rejection: From Rav Nachman, we see that Rav Papi is wrong.

(Rav Nachman): R. Meir used to say that if a man finds a Get in the trash with the proper names, if he told witnesses to sign it and gave it to his wife, she is divorced.

Chachamim only argue because they say that a Get must be written Lishmah (with intent for the man and woman). They agree about other documents!

(Rav Asi): If a document was paid up, it may not be used for another loan, because its power to obligate payment had been pardoned.

If not for this, it could be used, even though it appears to be false!

Levi (claims that he) deposited seven pearls wrapped in a garment with R. Miyasha. R. Miyasha died, without leaving any instructions.

R. Ami: (We believe Levi.) Firstly, R. Miyasha is not estimated to be rich. Secondly, Levi has an identifying Siman.

This applies only if Levi is not frequent in the house. If he is, perhaps another man deposited them, and Levi saw the pearls there.

David (claims that he) deposited a silver cup with Chasa. Chasa died, without leaving any instructions.

Rav Nachman: I know that Chasa is not rich. Also, David has an identifying Siman.

This applies only if David is not frequent in the house. If he is, perhaps another man deposited it, and David saw it there.

Yakov deposited a silk garment with Rav Dimi. Rav Dimi died, without leaving any instructions.

R. Aba: I know that Rav Dimi is not rich. Also, Yakov has an identifying Siman.

This applies only if Yakov is not frequent in the house. If he is, perhaps another man deposited it, and Yakov saw it there.

A (dying) man said that 'My property should go to Tuvya.' After he died, Tuvya showed up.

R. Yochanan: He gets the property.

If he said 'to Tuvya', and Rav Tuvya came, we do not give to him. The man said 'Tuvya', not Rav Tuvya;

However, if he is familiar with and informal with Rav Tuvya, he would call him Tuvya.

If two men called Tuvya come, and one is a neighbor and the other a Chacham, the Chacham receives it.

If one is a relative, the other a Chacham, the Chacham receives it.

Question: Who comes first, a neighbor or a relative?

Answer: "A close neighbor is better than a distant brother."

If both are Chachamim, both are relatives, or both are neighbors the judges gives it to whom they sees fit (Rashi - to whom they think the giver intended; R. Tam - to whichever man the judges prefer).

(Rava): Shmuel said that if Yakov sold a loan document he can pardon the debt. Even Yakov's heir can pardon it. However, if a woman brought a loan document into marriage, Shmuel would agree that she cannot pardon the debt, since her husband has an equal hand in her property.

A relative of Rav Nachman sold her Kesuvah (the buyer bought rights to collect it if she will be widowed or divorced). She was divorced, and then died. The buyer came to collect from her daughter (who inherited her, and claimed her mother's Kesuvah from her father).

Rav Nachman: Won't someone counsel her to pardon her father's obligation to pay her mother's Kesuvah (and then she will inherit that money from her father)?