|(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)
1) [line 1] DAYANEI GOLAH - the judges of the Diaspora, i.e. the Amora'im Shmuel and Karna (RASHBAM; however, see Sanhedrin 17b where only Karna is mentioned)
2) [line 1] KOL SHEHA'OL KOVSHO - all trees that are bent over by the thick wooden yoke (of the plowing oxen) [as it passes alongside them]
3) [line 5] SEDAN PLONI - the [sycomore] trunk of so-and-so (see Background to Bava Basra 68:30-31)
4a) [line 28] MI AMRINAN, "MIGO D'IY BA'I AMAR 'NE'ENSU,' MEHEMAN, HASHTA NAMI MEHEMAN?" - Do we say, "Since had he (the Nifkad, the one with whom the money was deposited) wanted to [lie], he could have said [a better, more believable lie, claiming] 'Ne'ensu,' 'They (the coins or money) were stolen or lost in an unavoidable accident [for which I am not responsible],' [for which] he is believed, now [that he claims that he returned them,] he is also believed?"
b) [line 28] MI AMRINAN, "MIGO... (MAH LI L'SHAKER?)
*5*) [last line] V'LIT'AMICH, V'CHI AMAR LEI "NE'ENSU," MI MATZI AMAR LEI, "SHETARACH B'YADI MAI BA'I?!" - the claim "Shetarach b'Yadi Mai Ba'i?!" "[If you returned the money, as you claim, then] what is your document doing in my hand?!" does not have the legal weight of witnesses to override a "Mah Li l'Shaker." For example, with a claim of "Ne'ensu," we totally discount the presence of the document in the hands of the Nifkad
6) [line 1] LAV SHEVU'AH BA'I?! - Does he not need to take an oath?!
(SHEVU'AH: SHEVU'AS HA'SHOMRIM)
1. SHOMER CHINAM - the Shomer Chinam is one who watches an item without demanding compensation from the owner. He is liable for damages only in cases of Peshi'ah (negligence), but not in cases of theft or loss, and certainly not in a case of Ones (an unavoidable accident).(b) When one of the Shomrim exempts himself from payment by claiming that the item was stolen, lost or Ne'enas (respective to their individual liabilities, as above), the Torah obligates him to support his claim by taking an oath (Shemos 22:7-10). Accordingly, a Shomer Chinam swears that he was not negligent; a Shomer Sachar swears that the item was Ne'enas and a Sho'el swears that the item was damaged in the normal manner of usage. In addition, a Shomer Chinam or a Shomer Sachar must swear that they did not use the object that they were guarding. (Using the object without the owner's permission would make the Shomer liable even for Ones.) Only after they swear are they exempt from payment. These oaths are among the Shevu'os ha'Shomrim.
(c) The explanation above follows the opinion of the RASHBAM. TOSFOS, however, citing Rabeinu Tam, states that the Shevu'ah to which our Gemara is referring is a Shevu'ah d'Rabanan that was enacted before the Shevu'as Heses (see Background to Bava Metzia 103:3).
7) [line 3] SHETAR KIS - a document [recounting the investment] of a money bag [with the father of the orphans. The investor now uses the document to reclaim his money.] (see entry #9)
8a) [line 4] DAYANEI GOLAH - see entry #1.
9) [line 7] HAI ISKA PALGA MILVEH U'FALGA PIKADON - this investment
arrangement of "Iska" is considered to be half a loan and half a deposit
10) [line 13] MAL'ACH HA'MAVES HU D'ANSEI - [it is possible to claim on the behalf of his orphans that he would have told them about the outstanding Iska, but] the Angel of Death caused him to have an unavoidable accident (i.e. he died) [before he was able to tell them]