Reuven and Shimon were visiting Levi. They reminisced about the year they had roomed together in yeshiva, three years earlier.
“I found in my house a small, four -volume Shas that belongs to you,” Shimon said to Reuven. “You must have lent it to me then.”
“I wondered where it had gone,” said Reuven. “Anyway, I bought a new Shas last year.”
“I can use a small Shas,” said Levi. “I use my chevrusa‘s all the time.”
“Fine; give the Shas to Levi,” Reuven said to Shimon. “He can have it.”
After they left, Reuven said to Shimon: “The truth is, my brother also wants a small Shas. Forget what I said earlier; give the Shas back to me.”
“But you already told me to give it to Levi,” said Shimon.
“I’ll deal with Levi later,” said Reuven. “I’ll explain to him that my brother needs it.”
“But maybe it’s already Levi’s?” asked Shimon. “I can’t give you what’s already his!”
“How could it be Levi’s already?!” asked Reuven. “Since when does a verbal statement transfer ownership, without any accompanying act of acquisition – kinyan? Levi didn’t make any kinyan on the Shas, so it’s still mine.”
“I’m not willing to return the Shas to you without consulting Rabbi Dayan first,” announced Shimon.
“That’s fine,” replied Reuven, “but I’m sure that nothing will come of it!”
Reuven and Shimon went to Rabbi Dayan. “I’m holding a small Shas that belongs to Reuven, who told me to give it to Levi,” Shimon said. “Reuven would now like it back. Should I return it to him?”
“Was Levi also present when Reuven instructed you to give him the Shas?” asked Rabbi Dayan.
“Yes, we were all sitting together,” replied Shimon. “Does that make a difference?”
“Indeed,” answered Rabbi Dayan. “If the three of you were all together, the Shas already belongs to Levi through a special institution of the Sages called ma’amad shloshtan.”
“What is that?” asked Reuven.
“Ma’amad shloshtan means that the three involved parties – the giver, the recipient, and the third party holding the asset – are present together,” explained Rabbi Dayan. “Then, if the giver instructs the holder to transfer the asset to the recipient, either as a gift or to cover debt, he immediately acquires it. The transfer is binding and none of the parties can subsequently retract.” (C.M. 126:1)
“How does this work?” asked Reuven.
“The Gemara (Gittin 14a; B.B. 144a) teaches that the Sages instituted this as a law without basis,” replied Rabbi Dayan. “It was initially instituted to facilitate commerce. Often a person has money, a loan due, or other moveable assets in the hand of a third party and would like to use it to pay for a purchase. Normally, this would require an act of acquisition by the seller/recipient to take ownership of that asset. In order to facilitate the transaction, the Sages instituted that assets or loans held by a third party are transferred through the mere instruction of the owner in the presence of all three parties. It’s like a debit card of old.” (Sma 126:4; Aruch HaShulchan C.M. 126:1)
“Does this require agreement of all parties?” asked Shimon. “What if the holder is not interested in dealing with the recipient?”
“According to many authorities, ma’amad shloshtan works even when the holder dissents,” answered Rabbi Dayan. “The Shulchan Aruch rules this way as the accepted opinion. The Shach, however, disagrees and maintains that consent, or at least silent acquiescence, of all three parties is required, but if the holder refused the order, the recipient does not acquire the asset. The Shach further posits that for this reason the Sages required that all three parties be present.” (C.M. 126:5,7; Shach 126:26,28; Pischei Choshen, Halva’ah 11:5)