Jan 192017

In the event of the borrower’s death, if one had taken a collateral, he can keep it as payment for the loan.  If there was no collateral and no land to collect from, the lender would lose his money.  Does the collateral need to be in his hands at the time of death or is it enough that he took a collateral earlier?  Can we expound the reason for mitzvot in the Torah or not?  There is an argument between Rabbi Shimon and Rabbi Yehuda about this regarding not taking collateral from a widow.  Is it only a poor widow (so that when he reutrns it everyday, people won’t speak negatively about the widow that a man is visiting her house everyday) or any widow?  The gemara questions this as the opinions seem switched in a different area (a king not being allowed many wives).  The issue is resolved.  It is forbidden to take the millstone as collateral and the verse adds “because he is taking his soul (livelihood)”.  Is that adding on an extra negative commandment or is it coming to include other items that are essential to his existence?  There is an argument about this and the gemara tries to see whether this argument matches the argument between Rava and Abaye regarding not eating the Pesach sacrifice raw or uncooked as the verse also adds “because it needs to be roasted” – if one eats it raw, is he transgressing 2 commandments or one.  The gemara rejects the comparison.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.