1)A DOCUMENT IN THE BORROWER'S HANDWRITING
(a)(Mishnah): If Reuven presents a document in Shimon's handwriting saying that Shimon owes him, he collects from Bnei Chorin.
(b)Question (Rabah bar Noson): If Beis Din validated such a document, what is the law?
(c)Answer (R. Yochanan): (It does not become like a proper document. Still) he only collects from Bnei Chorin.
(d)Question (Rami bar Chama - Mishnah): There are three kinds of Gitin that are Pasul (mid'Rabanan). If a woman remarried relying on such a Get, the children are not Mamzerim:
1.The husband wrote it in his own handwriting, witnesses did not sign;
2.Witnesses signed, but it has no date;
3.It has a date, but only one witness signed.
4.R. Eliezer says, even if no witnesses signed, if he gave it to her in front of witnesses, it is Kosher, and (Rashbam - such a loan document; one version in Rashi - the Kesuvah) can be collected from Meshubadim (sold property).
(e)Version #1 (our text, Rashbam) Answer: That case is different, for from the time he wrote the document (intending to give it in front of witnesses), he obligated himself (therefore, it is like a proper loan document).
(f)Version #2 (Rashi) Answer: That case is different, for from the time (i.e. of Nisu'in) that he became responsible to pay her Kesuvah (if she will be widowed or divorced) he obligated himself (and this is known to all).
2)TESTIMONY ON ARVUS
(a)(Mishnah): If an Arev accepted Arvus in a document underneath the signatures...
(b)(Rav): If he signed before the signatures, the lender collects even from Meshubadim. If he signed after the signatures, he collects from Bnei Chorin.
(c)Contradiction: A different time, Rav taught that even if he signed before the signatures, the lender collects only from Bnei Chorin!
(d)Answer: If he wrote 'Ploni is an Arev', this is a new matter. The signatures do not refer to it. It is as if he signed after the signatures (he collects only from Bnei Chorin);
1.If he wrote 'and Ploni is an Arev', this is part of the document. The signatures testify also about it (so he collects even from Meshubadim).
(e)(R. Yochanan): In either case ('Ploni is an Arev' or 'And Ploni'), he only collects from Bnei Chorin.
(f)Question: Does he really say that if he wrote 'And Ploni is an Arev', he only collects from Bnei Chorin?!
1.(Beraisa): If a personal note ('give my regards...') was appended to a Get and witnesses signed underneath it, the Get is Pasul. We are concerned lest they signed only on the greeting, and not on the Get.
2.(R. Amah citing R. Yochanan): If it says 'give my regards', it is Pasul. If it says 'and give...' it is Kosher.
(g)Answer: When R. Yochanan said 'in either case', he meant that whether he signed before or after the signatures, he only collects from Bnei Chorin;
1.The case is, he wrote 'Ploni is an Arev' (without 'and').
(h)Question: If so, he agrees with Rav!
(i)Answer: Indeed, it should say 'and also R. Yochanan said...'
(j)(Mishnah): A case occurred in which R. Yishmael said that he collects from Bnei Chorin.
(k)(Rabah bar bar Chanah): Even though R. Yishmael praised Ben Nanas, the Halachah follows R. Yishmael.
(l)Question: What does R. Yishmael say in a case of choking? (Is the Arev obligated?)
(m)Answer: R. Yakov said that R. Yishmael argues even in a case of choking.
(n)Question: Does the Halachah follow R. Yishmael there?
(o)Answer: Ravin said that R. Yishmael argues even in a case of choking, and the Halachah follows him even there.
(p)(Rav Yehudah): In a case of choking, if the Arev made a Kinyan to obligate himself, he is obligated.
(q)Inference: If it was not a case of choking, no Kinyan is required!
1.This argues with Rav Nachman.
2.(Rav Nachman): An Arev of Beis Din does not need a Kinyan.
3.Inference: A regular Arev needs a Kinyan!
(r)The Halachah is, an Arev at the time of the loan does not need a Kinyan. An Arev after the money was given needs a Kinyan;
1.An Arev of Beis Din does not need a Kinyan. With the benefit that he is trusted, he decides absolutely to obligate himself.
HADRAN ALACH MASECHES BAVA BASRA