(Mishnah): Reuven asked Shimon (a grocer) for a Dinar's worth of Peros. Shimon gave to him, and asked for the money. Reuven said 'I already gave to you. You put it in your pouch!'

Reuven swears [that he gave to him, and keeps the Peros].

Reuven gave a Dinar to Shimon and asked for the Peros. Shimon said "I already gave to you, and you took them to your house!"

Shimon swears [that he gave to him, and he is exempt].

R. Yehudah says, whoever holds the Peros has the upper hand (i.e. in the prior case, Reuven need not swear).

Reuven asked Shimon (a moneychanger) for a Dinar's worth of smaller coins. Shimon gave to him, and asked for the Dinar. Reuven said 'I already gave to you, and you put it in your pouch!'

Reuven swears [that he gave to him, and keeps the coins].

Reuven asked Shimon for the smaller coins for which he already gave a Dinar. Shimon said 'I already gave to you, and you put it in your wallet!'

Shimon swears [that he gave to him and is exempt].

R. Yehudah says, a moneychanger does not give an Isar (a small coin) before he receives his Dinar (a bigger coin).

(Gemara - R. Chanina): There is an argument [about our Mishnah. R. Yehudah holds that also here, he swears only if he partially admits.]

Question (Beraisa - R. Yehudah): When is this? It is when the box [of Peros] is resting between them, but if one of them is holding it [ha'Motzi me'Chavero Alav ha'Re'ayah, and the Muchzak need not swear. R. Yehudah did not say that he swears only if he partially admits!]

Answer: Also this is an argument. (Just like in our Mishnah, R. Yehudah requires partial admission, but he did not mention it, also in this Beraisa. We explained this like RIDVAZ.)

Limitation: [In our Mishnah, R. Yehudah] refers to a visitor, but for someone of the city, [a moneychanger] would give an Isar before he receives his Dinar.

(Mishnah): Just like [Chachamim] said that Pogemes Kesuvasah (she admits that she received part of her Kesuvah) collects [the rest] only with a Shevu'ah, and if one witness testifies that it was paid, she collects only with a Shevu'ah...

And from property that the borrower sold, or from property of orphans, or one who collects in [the owner's] absence, one collects only with a Shevu'ah...

Similarly, orphans must swear to collect (from other orphans) 'father did not instruct us [not to collect this document], our father did not tell us [that this document was paid], nor did we find a document among father's documents saying that this document was paid';

R. Yochanan ben Brokah testified that even if the son was born after the father died, he swears (that he did not find a receipt) and collects;

R. Shimon ben Gamliel says, if witnesses testify that just before the father died, he said that the document was not paid, the orphans collect without swearing.

(Gemara - R. Zeira): All of these are enactments like Torah Shevu'os [but they are not truly Torah Shevu'os, e.g. Modeh b'Miktzas];

Source: A woman's Kesuvah - she is not Muchzak that she already collected it! (Rather, she swears and collects. This shows that it is not a Torah Shevu'ah.) Rather, we consider it as if she collects from now and onwards. He is like one who claims that she seeks to collect from him with a paid document of 200, and she says [that she is still owed] 100. She collects only with a Shevu'ah

A Mishnah there (in Kesuvos) teaches that one who is Pogemes her Kesuvah collects only with a Shevu'ah;

What is the case? Her Kesuvah was 1000, and he tells her "you collected your Kesuvah", and she says "I collected only 100." She collects only with a Shevu'ah.

(Beraisa): This refers to Pogemes, but not to Pocheses (one who reduces. If her Kesuvah says 200, and she says that from the beginning it was 100, she collects without a Shevu'ah, for there were no dealings between them. However, Pogemes is like Modeh b'Miktzas.)

Objection (Rav Chisda): (In Sanhedrin, R. Ba taught that if a man was Pogem his document in Beis Din and he died, his son does not collect.) Is it because he took two steps?! Because he was Pogem it in Beis Din, you say that he does not collect?! (If he was Pogem it outside of Beis Din, he collects!)

(R. Yochanan citing R. Yanai): We collect from minor orphan's property only if Ribis is accumulating against them (e.g. the lender is a Nochri. We do so, for this saves money for them.).

(R. Nasan): We collect from their property even to a pay a Kesuvah.

(R. Mana): This is due to food. (Once they pay her Kesuvah, she is no longer fed from the estate.)

(R. Masniya): Who is concerned for food? It is R. Shimon, for R. Shimon says that it depends on food.

Question: What is Rabanan's reason [to collect a Kesuvah from minor orphans]?

Answer: It is due to grace (to encourage marriage), so people will be eager to marry [the widow, for she has property].

(R. Nasan): Even theft and damage [we collect from minor orphans].

(R. Yosi): We learned both of these [in Mishnayos]!

We learn theft from [the Mishnah] "if [a man died, and he had stolen] something with Achrayus, [the heir] must pay."

Note: We taught above that to save from Ribis and food, we collect from minor orphans. Presumably, R. Nasan teaches that we collect theft from minor orphans. Obviously we collect it from adult orphans! However, there is no proof that this Mishnah (Bava Kama 10:1) discusses minor orphans! In the Yerushalmi on this Mishnah, Sumchus says that we collect only from adults! Below, the Sugya proves that the Mishnah about damage discusses minors. Why does it not do so for the Mishnah about theft? I answer that R. Yosi cites the Tosefta (Bava Kama 10:21), which says so explicitly about minor orphans. The words "Im Hayah" are not in the Tosefta; they should be deleted. Perhaps a scribe inserted them, for he thought that R. Yosi cites the Mishnah - PF.

We learn damage from [the Mishnah] "for damage, we collect from orphans' property only from Ziburis (low quality land)";

Contradiction (Beraisa): The son stands in place of his father - damage is collected from Idis (best quality land), a creditor from Beinonis (middle quality land) and a Kesuvah from Ziburis.

Resolution (R. Yosi bei R. Bun): Here (the Beraisa teaches that an adult son is in place of his father to pay damage from Idis) discusses an adult orphan, and here (the Mishnah says that we collect damage from orphans' property only from Ziburis) discusses a minor orphan.

Question: Here you say that we do not swear due to the claim of a Cheresh, lunatic or minor, and here you say "but we swear to a minor or Hekdesh"!

Answer: [We swear to a minor] when we collect from the minor's property (but it is not due to his claim, rather, due to Ribis or food...)

Question: (Our Mishnah taught that one collects in [the owner's] absence only with a Shevu'ah.) Do we collect from someone in his absence?

Answer (R. Yirmeyah): The case is, Ribis is accumulating.

Question: Does Beis Din collect Ribis?!

Answer: The case is, he was an Arev for a loan from a Nochri. (If he himself borrowed from the Nochri, we would not collect from his property, lest he does not really owe. Regarding an Arev, we can say that the borrower is here and agrees that he owes.)

Lichsah, to R. Mana: We (in Bavel) do better than you (in Eretz Yisrael)! We send warnings [to someone before we collect from his property in his absence]. If he comes, this is fine. If not, we give his property [to the claimant].

R. Mana: Also we do so! We announce for 30 days [that we will give his property to the claimant]. If he comes, this is fine. If not, we give his property.

Lichsah: Exert yourself [and you will find the answer]! If [the defendant] was far away (he will not hear the announcements)!

R. Mana: We send three letters [to summons him to Din]. One is within 30 days [of the claim], one within 30 days [of the first], and one within 30 days [of the second]. If he comes, this is fine. If not, we give his property.

(R. Chaninah): This is if he stood in Din and fled, but if he did not stand in Din, we do not give his property (right away), rather, [first] we announce.

[A Mishnah (Kesuvos 13:1) teaches that if a man went overseas and his wife requests food, Chanan says that she swears only at the end, when she collects her Kesuvah. In Mishnah 9:8, R. Shimon says that as long as a widow does not claim her Kesuvah, the heirs cannot make her swear about food. When you investigate,] you find that Chanan and R. Shimon taught the same matter. Just like you say that the Halachah follows Chanan, similarly the Halachah follows R. Shimon.

(Rav): (Our Mishnah taught that one collects from property of orphans only with a Shevu'ah, and similarly, orphans collect only with a Shevu'ah.) If the borrower died, the lender swears to his heirs. And even if the lender died, the lender's heirs swear to the borrower;

However, if the borrower died first, and afterwards the lender died, the lender was already obligated a Shevu'ah to the borrower's sons, and one cannot bequeath a Shevu'ah (the right to swear and collect) to his sons.

R. Yochanan heard this and said "will [the borrower's heirs] consume [the lender's money] and rejoice?!" (Rather, the lender's heirs swear that their father did not say that the debt was paid, and they collect.)

(R. Chiyah bar Ashi citing Rav): If the lender holds a Simpon (receipt) in his own handwriting, it is Pasul. I say "you were engaging in your documents" (you prepared it in case the borrower will pay you).

Question: If someone else holds it, is it Kosher?

Answer: (No.) R. Avina taught in the name of Shmuel that it is Pasul unless the borrower or his Shali'ach holds it. (We explained this like OHR ZARU'A.)

Implied question: (Our Mishnah says that orphans swear "we did not find [a Simpon] among his documents saying that the document was paid." I.e. if they found one, we follow it!) How do we answer this?

Answer (R. Yosi bei R. Bun): It is like everyone; it discusses a command. (One would not give a command to discredit his document unless it was truly paid - PNEI MOSHE Bava Metzi'a 1:8.)