daf bit: Shabbat 78

[cellio]

The talmud is discussing items that one is forbidden to carry (handle?) on Shabbat. A mishna on today's daf lists many items, including "paper that is large enough to write a tax-collector's receipt on". This leads to a discussion in the g'mara about tax-collector's receipts and debt notes.

Our rabbis taught: if one carries out a tax-collector's receipt before having shown it to the collector he is liable, but if after, he is not. But R. Yehudah says he is liable even after because he still needs the document (as proof that he does not owe). Similarly for a note of debt, the rabbis say he is liable before settlement but not after, and R. Yehudah says even after. R. Yosef raises the question of whether it is permitted to keep a note of debt after it is settled, and Abaye says all agree that a note of debt cannot be kept. So the disagreement here is about the case of waiting for confirmation; a debt might be settled but be waiting for confirmation. (78b)

I seem to recall learning, I think in Bava Metzia, that when a debt is settled the note is destroyed. Here, peaking ahead to the next page, I see a reference to writing a quittance. I don't know if that means we do both, if a quittance doesn't end up being normative, or if my memory is just plain faulty. (My, err, money is on the last.) Also, I'm unclear on a system where payment and settlement (quittance or destroying the note) aren't simultaneous.

Comments

[loosecanon.livejournal.com]

I think it's the semantics; a "note" would be the bill, where the receipt does not require the value to be recorded, it might state only that the dues have been paid and the debt is clear.

[richardf8]

The Sugya from BM that you're thinking of concerns what happens if a debt note is found. If three are found together written by one creditor to three debtors, they are presumed to be the property of that creditor (and unsettled). If three are found together written by three creditors to one debtor, they are presumed to be the property of the debtor (and settled). This would suggest that debt notes were not to be kept by the creditor once paid, but that the debtor could keep it (presumably as evidence that the debt had been paid, because if it had not it would still be in the creditor's possession).

My weekly talmud group just finished studying this sugya, so it's sort of handy in my brain.