Bava Batra

But this  is not done at the present time?  — He replied to him: The Rabbis have made the necessary provision. Whosoever acts [accordingly] reaps the benefit;  he who does not act [accordingly] has himself to blame, for any loss suffered. Raba son of R. Shila said to those who were writing deeds of transfer:  When you write deeds of transfer enter  the date of transfer  if you know it; and if not, enter the date on which the deed is prepared,  so that it  might not have the appearance of a falsehood. Rab said to his scribes, and R. Huna, similarly, said to his scribes: When you are at Shili write [in any deed] 'at Shili', although the information was given to you at Hini;  when you are at Hini, write, 'at Hini',  although the information was given to you at Shili. Raba said: If a man [who] is in possession of a bond of a hundred zuz, said, 'Convert it into two bonds each of fifty zuz',  his request must not be granted.  What is the reason? — The Rabbis instituted a law  which is acceptable to the creditor and is [also] acceptable to the borrower. It is acceptable to the creditor in that [the debtor is thereby] compelled to repay him [the entire loan];  and it is [also] acceptable to the borrower in that [the legal force of] the bond is [thereby]  impaired. Raba further stated: If a man, holding two bonds each of fifty [zuz:], requests that they be converted into one [bond] of a hundred [zuz], his request must not be granted,  [because] the Rabbis have ordained a law  which is agreeable to the creditor and is also agreeable to the borrower. It is agreeable to the creditor in that [the force of] his bond is not [thereby] impaired;  and it is [also] agreeable to the borrower in that he is not [thereby]  under pressure to repay the debt. R. Ashi said: If a man holds a bond for a hundred zuz and requests that it be converted into  one of fifty [zuz],  his request must not be granted. What is the reason? — We assume [the debtor] had already repaid him that [loan] and [that when] he asked him for the return of his bond  he was told [that] he  had lost it and [so] he wrote out for him a quittance  but [that later] he would produce that [new bond] and claim,  'This is [for] another [loan]'. MISHNAH. [IN THE CASE OF] TWO BROTHERS, THE ONE POOR AND THE OTHER  RICH, WHOM THEIR FATHER HAD LEFT A BATH-HOUSE OR AN OLIVE-PRESS, [IF] HE BUILT THESE [TO BE LET OUT] ON HIRE, THE RENT BELONGS TO THE COMMON ESTATE.  [IF,] HOWEVER, HE BUILT THEM FOR HIS OWN [USE]  THE RICH [BROTHER] MAY  SAY TO THE POOR [BROTHER], BUY FOR YOURSELF SLAVES THAT THEY MAY BATHE IN THE BATH-HOUSE', [OR] 'BUY FOR YOURSELF OLIVES AND COME AND PREPARE [THEM] IN THE OLIVE-PRESS'. IF THERE WERE TWO [MEN] IN THE SAME TOWN [AND THE] NAME OF THE ONE [WAS] JOSEPH SON OF SIMEON AND THE NAME OF [THE] OTHER [WAS] JOSEPH SON OF SIMEON, NEITHER MAY PRODUCE A BOND OF INDEBTEDNESS AGAINST THE OTHER, NOR MAY ANOTHER [PERSON] PRODUCE A BOND OF INDEBTEDNESS AGAINST THEM.  [IF] A MAN FOUND AMONG HIS DEEDS [A QUITTANCE SHOWING THAT] THE BOND OF JOSEPH SON OF SIMEON [WAS] DISCHARGED, THE BONDS OF BOTH [ARE CONSIDERED TO BE] DISCHARGED. HOW SHOULD THEY PROCEED?  THEY SHOULD INDICATE THE THIRD [GENERATION].  AND IF [THEIR NAMES] ARE [ALIKE] TO THE THIRD [GENERATION], THEY ADD  [SOME PERSONAL] DESCRIPTION;  AND IF THEIR [PERSONAL] DESCRIPTIONS ARE ALIKE THEY WRITE, 'PRIEST'. GEMARA. In a certain bond that was presented at the court of R. Huna there was [the following] entry:  'I.X, son of Y, borrowed from you  a maneh'.