Bava Batra 33a — the Talmud in English

But

besides this debt,

I had

another

sum of money with him

[he owed me an additional debt, for which I had a promissory note against him].

And I had eaten the years of the mortgage,

[I had finished eating the number of years that had been fixed between us]; but I had not returned the land to the orphans, and as a result a report went out about me that I was eating the orphans’ land.

But I continued eating because of the additional promissory note that I had against the orphans; and the reason that I did not come to the court to claim the debt, so that the court would collect it for me, was that

I said

to myself:

If I return the land to the orphans, and say

to the court

that I have another sum of money with your father

[if I return the land to the orphans and bring a claim against them in court on the basis of the promissory note for the other debt that I hold], then

the Sages said: “

One who comes to collect from the property of orphans may collect only by means of an oath,”

that their father has still not repaid me this debt, and it would turn out that the court would require me to swear before they collected the loan from the orphans; and I do not wish to swear, even truthfully—

And so I thought to myself:

I will conceal the mortgage document in my possession, and eat the amount of my money

[I will conceal the mortgage document in which it is written that I am not the owner of the field, and I will continue eating beyond the appointed time until even the second debt is covered], and I cannot be required to swear retroactively, because with regard to the past I am believed without an oath,

since, by virtue of the fact that if I wished I could say

[if I wished to claim]: “

It was purchased by me,”

and it would be

believed,

for I had already eaten it for the period of presumptive ownership,

when I say

also: “

I have money with you”

[even with the claim “I have money with you”]—

I am believed

even without an oath.

Abaye said to

Rava bar Shereshum: This is not a good migo, for

“It was purchased by me”

you cannot say

[you cannot claim it],

for there is a public report concerning it that it is the land of orphans

[for a report went out that the land belongs to orphans]!

Rather, go and return it to them, and when the orphans grow up, conduct litigation with them

[go and return the land to the orphans, and when the orphans grow up] bring them to court], and then swear that their father did not repay the debt, and collect your debt from them.

An incident involving

a relative of Rav Idi bar Avin,

who

died and left a palm tree; Rav Idi bar Avin said: “I am the closer relative”,

and

a certain man

and

said: “

I am the closer relative,”

[a relative of Rav Idi bar Avin died and left a palm tree to his relatives, and Rav Idi bar Avin and another relative disputed which of them was closer to the deceased, so that he would be the one to inherit the palm tree], and there was no evidence for either one or the other.

That man was stronger than Rav Idi bar Avin, and he ate the produce of the palm tree, for such is the law in a case of doubt of this kind: “Whoever is stronger prevails,” until

in the end he admitted to him

that certain man to Rav Idi

that

indeed

he—

Rav Idi—

was the closer relative

[in the end that man admitted that Rav Idi was indeed the closer relative], and

Rav Hisda established it in his possession

[Rav Hisda placed the palm tree in Rav Idi’s possession].

He said to him,

Rav Idi bar Avin said to Rav Hisda: Since this man admitted that I am the closer relative, then this man was eating the produce of the palm tree unlawfully until now, and I claim: “

Let him return to me the produce that he ate from that day until now,”

[let him return to me the value of the produce that he ate from the day he began eating it until today]!

Rav Hisda said:

And is

this man—

Rav Idi—

the one of whom it is said: “

He is a great man”!?

But

upon whom is the Master relying concerning this? Upon this one, who said, ‘I am the closer relative’—

You have no evidence at all that you are the closer relative; rather, you rely upon this man’s admission. And this admission occurred only now, whereas until now he had claimed that he was the closer relative, and he was eating the produce lawfully, for “whoever is stronger prevails”; and you have no claim whatsoever against him.

But

Abaye and Rava did not accept

the position of

Rav Hisda,