Gittin

that for the sake of the benefit which the borrower derives from the difference [in time of payment] between the old debt and the new one, he willingly pledges himself to the new creditor.  Said Huna Mar the son of R. Nehemiah to R. Ashi: If that is so, what of people like those from the house of Bar Eliashib, who force their debtors to pay at once? Do they not acquire possession in such a case as this?  And if you say they do, then you apply different standards to different people? — The truth is, said Mar Zutra, that there are three laws which the Rabbis have laid down arbitrarily without [giving] a reason. One is this one. A second is the one laid down by Rab Judah in the name of Samuel: If a [dying] man assigns in writing all his property to his wife, he only makes her a trustee for it.  The third is the one laid down by R. Hananiah: If a man celebrates the marriage of his son who is over age in a special house, the son becomes the owner of the house. Rab once said to R. Aha Bardala: You have a kab of saffron of mine, give it to So-and-so, and I am telling you in his presence that I do not mean to change my mind. Are we to understand from this that if he had desired to change his mind he could have done so? — What Rab meant was that instructions such as these  cannot be retracted. But this has already been laid down by Rab, since R. Huna said in the name of Rab: If a man says to another, You have a maneh of mine in your possession, give it to So-and-so, if he says this in the presence of the third party, [the latter] becomes legal owner? — If I had only that dictum to go by, I should suppose that this rule applies only to a big gift, but that for a small one it is not necessary for the third party to be present: now I know [that this is not so]. Some market gardeners [who were in partnership] once squared accounts with one another, and found that one had five staters  too much. Said the others to him in the presence of the owner of the land, 'Give it to the owner of the land',  and they duly acquired' from him.  Afterwards he reckoned up by himself, and found that he had nothing over. He went to consult R. Nahman. Said [the latter] to him: What can I do for you? For one thing, there is the rule laid down by R. Huna in the name of Rab,  and for another thing, they  duly 'acquired' from you. Said Raba to him: Does this man say. I am unwilling to pay? What he pleads is, I do not owe the money. Whereupon R. Nahman said: If so, possession has been transferred in error, and in such a case the money must always be returned. It has been stated: If a man says to another, 'Take to So-and-so the maneh which I owe him', Rab says. he continues to be responsible for it, and he is not at liberty to retract the commission, whereas Samuel says that since he is still responsible he is at liberty to retract. May we presume that the point at issue between them is this, that one authority  was of opinion that 'take' is equivalent to 'accept on behalf of',  and the other  was of opinion that 'take' is not equivalent to 'accept on behalf of'? — No. Both are agreed that 'take' is equivalent to 'accept on behalf of', and the point at issue is this, that one was of opinion that we make one ruing  because of another,  and the other was of opinion that we do not. It has been taught in agreement with Rab:  If a man says to another, Take to So-and-so the maneh which I owe him, give So-and-so the maneh which I owe him, take to So-and-so the maneh which he has given me in trust, give So-and-so the maneh which he has given me in trust, he remains responsible for the money, yet if he wishes to retract the commission he is not at liberty to do so. Why should he not be able to retract in the case of trust money, on the plea that [the depositor] does not desire his money to be in the hand of another [party]? — R. Zera answered: We assume that [the sender in this case] is known as a man who denies [his obligations].  R. Shesheth had some money owing to him in Mahuza for some cloaks [which he had sold there]. He said to R. Joseph b. Hama [who was going there]: When you come back from there, bring the money with you. [R. Joseph] went [to them] and they gave him the money. They said to him: 'Give us a quittance'.  At first he said, 'yes', but afterwards he excused himself. When he returned, R. Shesheth said to him: You acted quite rightly,  not to make yourself a borrower [who] is the slave of the lender.  According to another version he said to him: You acted quite rightly: 'a borrower is the slave of the lender.' R. Ahi the son of R. Josiah had a silver cup  in Nehardea.