The mishna assumes that one who swears falsely is the one who needs to ensure that he gets what he stole\u00a0directly to the one who he stole from. \u00a0But that if he stole but didn’t swear about it, it would be sufficient to send in the hands of a messenger. \u00a0The gemara questions how this fits in or doesn’t with an argument Rabbi Tarfon and Rabbi Akiva have regarding one who stole and five people claim he stole from them and he doesn’t know which one is the one he stole from. \u00a0Three different answers are brought. \u00a0The gemara then discusses an argument between Rav Hisda and Rabba about a case where one sent a messenger to receive his loan payment (for example) and appointed the messenger in front of witnesses, would this mean that the messenger is receiving it on his behalf and the borrower\u00a0is no longer responsible if something happens to the money on the way or is the messenger just there to make it easier for the borrower\u00a0to get the money back to the original owner but is not in fact assuming responsibility. \u00a0and if the item gets lost\/stolen on the way the borrower would need to repay the loan. \u00a0The nature of the payment of the one fifth is discussed – is it a gift to the one who was robbed in order to effect atonement for the robber or is it a financial payment? \u00a0Ramifications are also brought.<\/p>\n