(Mishnah): If a man wrote to his wife 'I have no vow or Shevu'ah against you', he cannot make her swear, but he can impose a Shevu'ah on her heirs or those who come with her authority (they bought her Kesuvah and come to collect after she was divorced, or the heirs come after she died).

If he wrote 'I have no vow or Shevu'ah against you, your heirs, or one who buys your Kesuvah', he cannot impose a Shevu'ah on her, her heirs or those who come with her authority, but his heirs can impose a Shevu'ah on her, her heirs or those who come with her authority.

(Gemara - R. Yonah and R. Yosah): (In the coming Mishnah, if he stipulated that also his heirs cannot make her swear, it takes effect.) This is not only for property that she had authority over it in her husband's lifetime - rather, it is even for property that she had authority over it after her husband died. The heirs cannot make her swear about it.

(Mishnah): If Reuven rented Shimon's cow, and lent it to Levi and it died normally, Reuven swears that it died normally, and Levi pays Reuven.

(R. Heila citing R. Yanai): This is if [the owner] gave him permission to lend to others.

Support (R. Chiyah - Beraisa): A borrower may not lend [the item to others], and a renter may not rent it, and a borrower may not rent it and a renter may not lend, and one with whom it was deposited may not deposit it with someone else, unless he has the owner's permission.

Any of them who deviated their Shemirah from the owner's intent, they are liable.

Question: A borrower is liable even if he did not deviate!

Answer: Because a Mishnah teaches that a Shomer Chinam can stipulate to be exempt from a Shevu'ah, and a borrower can stipulate to be exempt from paying...

[R. Chiyah] comes to teach that even if he stipulated to be exempt, and he is [normally] exempt, [if he gave the borrowed item to another without permission] he is liable.

Question: If [Reuven rented Shimon's cow, and lent it to Levi, if Shimon exempted the renter, and] he wants to make the borrower (Levi) swear, [can he]?

Answer: We learn from [our Mishnah]. If he wrote to her 'I have no vow or Shevu'ah against you', he cannot make her swear, but he can impose a Shevu'ah on her heirs or those who come with her authority.

Inference: [Even though he exempted the renter,] if he wants to make the borrower swear, he can.

We learn this (making the borrower swear) from that (our Mishnah), and we learn that (our Mishnah) from this (making the borrower swear);

We learn this from that, that if [he stipulated to exempt her from a Shevu'ah, and] he wants to make her swear, he cannot make her swear.

We learn that from this, that if [he exempted the renter, and] he wants to make the borrower swear, he makes him swear.

(R. Chaninah): There is no need to learn that from this! (Our Mishnah explicitly says that if he stipulated to exempt her from a Shevu'ah, he cannot. make her swear! We explained this like SEDEI YEHOSHUA.)

What do we need to learn that from this? It is like R. Heila taught in the name of R. Yanai - this is if [the owner] gave him permission to lend to others. And here, it is if he gave to her permission to make her children overseers. (If she did so without permission, she is liable for every loss that her husband suffered.)

(R. Yosi): [Even if the renter had permission to lend to others,] he must pay rent as long as it is rented to him (even though someone else uses it).

Question (R. Ze'ira, to R. Avuna): If the owner borrowed it [from the renter] and it died, [what is the law]?

Answer (R. Avuna): So we say - even if [the owner] ate it, [he is exempt].

(R. Yosi bar Avun): [The owner] ate his own. (Therefore, he is exempt.)

Question (R. Ze'ira, to R. Yosa): [If a Shomer gave the deposit to another Shomer,] how do we rule in practice?

Answer (R. Yosa): Two (Rav Yehudah and Reish Lakish) say [that the latter Shomer is liable] and four (R. Lazar, R. Yochanan, R. Chiya and R. Yanai) [say that the former is liable]. We do not rule like the two.

Rebuttal (R. Ze'ira): It is two against two! R. Lazar is the Talmid of R. Chiyah Ruba, and R. Yochanan is the Talmid of R. Yanai. (A Talmid and his Rebbi count only like one.)

(Mishnah): If he wrote 'I, my heirs, or one who buys my property have no vow or Shevu'ah against you, your heirs, or one who buys your Kesuvah', he cannot make her swear - not he, his heirs, or one who buys his property, [and they cannot make swear] her, her heirs, or one who buys her Kesuvah.'

If she went from burying her husband to her father's house, or returned to her father-in-law's house, and did not become an overseer, the heirs cannot make her swear.

If [her husband] made her an overseer, the heirs can make her swear about the future, but not about the past.

(Gemara - R. Yonah): [His Tenai helps] if she was an overseer in her husband's lifetime, but if she was an overseer after her husband's death, the heirs can make her swear. (It is their money. Their father's Tenai does not take effect for it.)

Support: [The Seifa of] our Mishnah teaches so. If she did not become an overseer, the heirs cannot make her swear. If she became an overseer, the heirs can make her swear about the future (after he died), but not about the past.

What is the past? It is from the time of death until burial.

(R. Yosi): Even if she was an overseer after her husband's death, the heirs cannot make her swear.

Question (Mishnah): If she did not become an overseer, the heirs cannot make her swear. If she became an overseer, the heirs can make her swear about the future, but not about the past.

Answer: He explains that this refers to the Reisha (Mishnah 5, in which he did not exempt her from swearing to his heirs).

Question: If it refers to the Reisha, [this is difficult, for] R. Yonah and R. Yosah both said this is not only for property that she had authority over it in her husband's lifetime - rather, it is even for property that she had authority over it after her husband died. The heirs cannot make her swear about it!

Answer: He explains that [the Reisha exempts from swearing about] from the time of death until burial;

(R. Avahu citing R. Yochanan): [For what she did] from the time of death until burial, the heirs cannot make her swear.

(Bar Kapara): This is lest she abandon the Mes and go to her father's house (for fear lest she need to swear about the expenditures).

(Mishnah): If one admits that she already received partial payment of her Kesuvah, she collects [the rest] only with a Shevu'ah;

If one witness says that it was paid, she collects only with a Shevu'ah.

From buyers, she collects only with a Shevu'ah. From orphans, she collects only with a Shevu'ah.

One who collects in her ex-husband's absence, she collects only with a Shevu'ah.

(Gemara - R. Ze'orah): All of [the Shevu'os in our Mishnah] are like Torah Shevu'os;

A woman's Kesuvah is Muchzak is in her hand to collect - it is as if she collected. He claims a paid document of 200 (I paid you, so I should get back the document), and she says only 100 [was paid. This resembles Modeh b'Miktzas. She collects only with a Shevu'ah. (We explained this like TALMID HA'RASHBA.)

(Beraisa): One who is Pogemes (admits that she already received partial payment, she collects only with a Shevu'ah), but not one who is Pocheses (admits that her Kesuvah is less than it says).

How is this? If the Kesuvah says 200, and she denies says that it is only 100, she is paid without swearing.

Question: What is the difference between Pogemes and Pocheses?

Answer (R. Chanina): Pogemes, there were dealings between them. (It resembles Modeh b'Miktzas.) Pocheses, there were no dealings between them. (PNEI MOSHE)

Question (R. Yirmeyah): Just like you say there that if one witness testifies that [her Kesuvah] was paid, she collects only with a Shevu'ah, if one witness testifies that [her Kesuvah] was less [than what is written], she should collect only with a Shevu'ah!

Answer (R. Yosi): When one witness testifies that it is less, he is like one witness who contradicts two, and one witness cannot contradict two.

(Beraisa): An heir whose father was Pogem his document, [the heir] collects [what his father said that he was still owed] without a Shevu'ah. In this way, the son has greater power than his father, for the son collects without a Shevu'ah, and the father collects only with a Shevu'ah.

(R. Elazar): [The son] swears the Shevu'ah of an heir - father did not instruct us [not to collect this document], father did not say to us [that it was paid], and we did not find a document among father's documents saying that this document was paid.

Question (R. Hoshayah): Is the Beraisa like Beis Shamai? Beis Shamai say that [a Sotah whose husband died], she receives her Kesuvah and does not drink. (Even though she cannot clarify her innocence, she collects. Also here that the heir cannot clarify that it was not fully paid, he collects.)

Answer (R. Yosi): There, Beis Shamai's reason is 'bring my husband, and I will drink!' (I should not lose because he is not here.) However, here, according to letter of the law, even his father should not swear. They enacted that he swears. They enacted for him, but not for his son. Since [the father] died, we leave the son on Torah law (he collects without a Shevu'ah).

If his father was obligated a Shevu'ah in Beis Din [in order to collect], and he died, his son does not collect.

Question: If this was not taught, what would we think - does a man bequeath [money that is collected only through] a Shevu'ah to his son?!

Answer (R. Avin): It was taught as follows. If his father was Pogem his document in Beis Din, his son does not collect.

Question (Rav Chisda): Because he took two steps [to enter Beis Din], does [his son] lose?! If he was Pogem it outside of Beis Din, you say that [his son] collects. Because he was Pogem it in Beis Din, you say that he does not collect?!

(Mishnah): From orphans, she collects only with a Shevu'ah.

(R. Yochanan citing R. Yanai): We collect from [minor] orphans' property only [to pay] a [Nochri's] document in which Ribis is accumulating, and some say even a woman's Kesuvah.

(R. Yanai): We collect a woman's Kesuvah for the sake of [exempting the orphans from] feeding her.

Who is concerned for food? It is R. Shimon, for R. Shimon says, it depends on collection. (She does not lose food for claiming her Kesuvah, only for collecting it - RIDVAZ.)

Question: What is Rabanan's [reason to collect a Kesuvah from minor orphans]?

Answer: It is due to grace, so all will be eager to marry [the widow, for she has property].

Some say, even theft and damage [we collect from minor orphans].

(R. Yosi): We learned both of these [in Mishnayos]!

We learn theft from [the Mishnah] "if [a man died, and he had stolen] something with Achrayus, [the heir] must pay."

Note: We taught above that to save from Ribis and food, we collect from minor orphans. Presumably, R. Nasan teaches that we collect theft from minor orphans. Obviously we collect it from adult orphans! However, there is no proof that this Mishnah (Bava Kama 10:1) discusses minor orphans! In the Yerushalmi on this Mishnah, Sumchus says that we collect only from adults! Below, the Sugya proves that the Mishnah about damage discusses minors. Why does it not do so for the Mishnah about theft? I answer that R. Yosi cites the Tosefta (Bava Kama 10:21), which says so explicitly about minor orphans. The words "Im Hayah" are not in the Tosefta; they should be deleted. Perhaps a scribe inserted them, for he thought that R. Yosi cites the Mishnah (PF).

We learn damage from [the Mishnah] "for damage, we collect from orphans' property only from Ziburis (low quality land)";

Contradiction (Beraisa): If [the father died, and] the son stood in place of the father, damage is collected from Idis (best quality land), a creditor from Beinonis (middle quality land) and a Kesuvah from Ziburis.

Resolution (R. Yosi bei R. Bun): Here (the Beraisa teaches that a son is in place of his father to pay damage from Idis) discusses an adult orphan, and here (the Mishnah says that we collect damage from orphans' property only from Ziburis) discusses a minor orphan.