Bava Batra 44: Testifying Regarding a Cow or Garment in Specific Circumstances

The rabbis continue their discussion about the baraita that describes testimony when three people involved with the robbery and resale of a field.  Regarding the parallel sale of a cow or garment, the rabbis point out further differences, including the need for the original owner to despair his loss.  

One who despairs the loss of a cow or garment would not despair of getting back his money, however.  If he is able to benefit from his own testimony, why would his testimony be valid?  Of course, the rabbis reason, the thief in this case must have died.  If the stolen item was fed or left to one's sons, it need not be returned.  If one of the three died, couldn't another one of the three testify for the heir of another?  The rabbis continue to discuss some of the permutations which could apply to those who might testify.  

The Gemara discusses further details regarding the sale of a cow or garment and testimony (because a creditor cannot collect these items from a buyer, testimony is permitted).  A loan document allows a creditor to collect "from the shirt off his back" as long as the borrower still owns the borrowed item.  A cow or a garment might be called an apotiki, a designated payment for a loan.  Rava made his slave an apotiki and sold him to a creditor who collected him.  An animal is not collected because it would not get publicity and thus the parties would not be considered 'forewarned'.

The rabbis continue examining the minutiae of these transactions and where testimony might be permitted.  Among other topics, they discuss the timing of buying and selling and how/when people are achrayut, responsible for the debated property.