Bava Batra

They are in disagreement only in [the case of] an ordinary Postdated deed,  [in] which [case] R. Judah follows his own view, according to which  no quittance is written,  and consequently no loss  would ensue,  while R. Jose follows his view according to which a quittance may be written and loss might consequently ensue.  R. Huna son of R. Joshua said: Even according to him who said [that] a quittance may be written, this may be done only  for a half,  but not for the whole [of the debt]. And [the law is] not so, but  even for the full amount of a debt  [a quittance] may be written; as in the case of R. Isaac b. Joseph. He claimed [a sum of] money from R. Abba whom he sued  before R. Hanina b. Papi. [When] he  said to him,  'Give me my money', [the other] replied to him, 'Return to me my deed and you will receive your money'. 'I lost your deed', said [R. Isaac] to him, '[but] I will write for you a quittance'. 'Surely', the other replied to him, 'It was both Rab and Samuel who said [that] no quittance was to be written'.'[Were] one [to] give us of the dust of Rab and Samuel', he  exclaimed, 'we should put it into our eyes;  but it was both R. Johanan and Resh Lakish who stated [that] a quittance is to be written'. Similarly, when Rabin came  he stated in the name of R. Elai [that] a quittance may be written. And it stands to reason that a quittance may be written; for should it be assumed [that] a quittance must not be written, [is it conceivable that where] the bond of this one  was lost, the other should eat  and enjoy himself! Abaye demurred: What then; is a quittance to be written? Should this one,  [if] the quittance of the other was lost, eat and enjoy himself? 'Yes', replied Raba to him, 'the debtor  is the slave of the creditor'. Elsewhere We learnt: Antedated bonds of indebtedness are invalid  and postdated [ones] are valid.  Said R. Hamnuna: This law applies only to  bonds of indebtedness but [in the case of] deeds of purchase and sale even [those which are] postdated are invalid. What is the reason? [A person] might sometimes sell [a plot of] land to another in Nisan and write [the deed] for him in Tishri; and in the meantime he might obtain some money and repurchase it from him.  But when Tishri arrived he  would produce it  and say, 'I have [subsequently] bought it from you again'.  If so, [in the case of] bonds of indebtedness also, one might sometimes borrow [money] in Nisan and write the bond for the creditor  in Tishri, and in the meantime he would obtain some money and repay him. When [however the debtor] requested the return of his  bond, he would reply to him, 'I lost it', and would [instead] write out for him a quittance. When [later] the date of payment  arrived he would produce it  and plead 'You have borrowed from me just now!' — He  holds the opinion that no receipt is to be written. Said R. Yemar to R. Kahana, and others say [that] R. Jeremiah of Difti said to R. Kahana: But [what of] the present time, when postdated deeds are written though quittances also are written?  He replied to him:  [This is permissible] since the time when R. Abba said to his scribes: 'When you write a postdated deed, write as follows: This deed was not written on the date indicated  but was postdated.' Said R. Ashi to R. Kahana: And [what of] the present time when this is not done!  — [This  is not necessary] since R. Safra instructed his scribes: When you write out quittances, enter the date of the deed  if you know it; if not, leave the quittance undated so that whenever [the deed] is produced [the receipt] will render it invalid. Said Rabina to R. Ashi, and others say [that] R. Ashi [said] to R. Kahana: