Bava Kamma 104: Witnesses and Legitimate Agents

If a robber steals from another person and takes a false oath about those actions, the robber is obligated to find the victim, wherever s/he is, and return the item plus penalties.  However, if a robber admits to the victim that he has stolen that item and does not take a false oath about his actions, he need not return the item on his own.  In fact, it is up to the victim to find the robber and take back the stolen item him/herself.  The item is considered to be on loan until the victim retrieves it.

In a similar vein, the Gemara discusses the role of an agent.  If a person has gone to the bother of authorizing an agent in front of witnesses to act on his/her behalf, shouldn't that agent be permitted to do whatever that person wants the agent to do?  Why should an agent's abilities be limited? The rabbis agree that a debtor who pays his debt to an agent has fulfilled his obligation.

The Gemara discusses complex circumstances which pose challenges to this ruling.  Who is permitted to appoint an agent?  Who is permitted to act on behalf of a debtor?  Rabbi Yochanan and Rabbi Elazar agree that an agent appointed in the presence of witnesses is a legally recognized agent. Any case that contradicts this assertion must have not met the criteria regarding witnesses.

And what if an agent appears with a 'sign' - perhaps a signature or a stamp - of the creditor?  What if witnesses attest to the validity of the 'signature'?  The rabbis teach us that such a document does not validate the agent.  Only a document signed by witnesses who state that the agent has been appointed can be used as a valid document.  This particular rule would seem to require specific knowledge by all parties involved.  How awful to be penalized for trusting a false agent simply because one was unaware of the halacha.  How educated was the general community about these rules?  Was there a given understanding not to trust the ancient version of an 'encyclopedia salesman'?  or in today's day, a Nigerian bank account holder who contacts us via email?

The Gemara then turns to the question of the remaining one-fifth payment if it is not paid along with the principal value of the stolen item.  Must the robber continue to pursue the victim with that money if he has sworn a false oath?  What if the victim has died?  What if a father admits but a son does not admit?  How are we to understand whether a past rabbi was referring to a derivation or money owed, based on the similar words used in his interpretation?  Like other small details, the rabbis insist on understanding the minutea as well as the larger principals based on Torah law.  That is why it is surprising to me that other details, like the experience of the young girl who has been sold into slavery or raped, are not examined with the same degree of scrutiny and care.