Bava Batra

R. Huna decided [that], 'from you' [might] even [signify] 'from the exilarch', and even 'from King Shapur'.  Said R. Hisda to Rabbah: Go and consider this matter,  for in the evening R. Huna will question you on the subject. He went out, carefully considered [the matter], and found [the following Baraitha] wherein it was taught: [In the case of] a letter of divorce which bears [the signatures of] witnesses but no date,  Abba Saul said: If there was written in it. 'I divorced you  this day,' it is valid. This  clearly proves that that day  [is taken] to mean that day on which it was produced,  [so] here also,  'from you' must mean from that person who produced [the bond]. Said Abaye to him: Is it not possible that Abba Saul holds the same view as R. Eleazar  who maintains that the witnesses to the delivery  affect the legal separation,  but here [surely, there is reason] to apprehend that it was lost!  He replied unto him: [That a deed] was lost is not to be apprehended.  And whence is it deduced that the losing [of a deed] is not to be apprehended? — For we learned: 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. Either of them,  however [it follows] may [produce a bond of indebtedness] against others. But why? Why not apprehend the loss [of the deed]?  from this  then  it may be deduced that we do not apprehend the loss. And Abaye?  We do not apprehend the loss [of a deed] by one [particular individual];  but we do apprehend loss [of deeds] generally by many.