## Bava Metzia Daf 115a

###### Bava Metzia 115a:1
[Bava Metzia 115a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/115a:1)

לָמָּה חוֹזְרִין וּמְמַשְׁכְּנִין? שֶׁלֹּא תְּהֵא שְׁבִיעִית מְשַׁמַּטְתּוֹ, וְלֹא יֵעָשֶׂה מִטַּלְטְלִין אֵצֶל בָּנָיו.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**why** does one **go back and take the collateral** again, as the creditor must anyway restore it to the debtor the following day? The Gemara replies: Any loan that is secured by collateral is not canceled by the Sabbatical Year, in contrast to other debts, which are canceled. Therefore, this ensures **that the Sabbatical** Year **should not cancel it. And** an additional reason is so that the collateral **should not become movable property** in the possession **of his children,** as one generally cannot claim such items from orphans to pay for their father’s debt.


###### Bava Metzia 115a:2
[Bava Metzia 115a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/115a:2)

טַעְמָא דַּהֲדַר וּמַשְׁכְּנֵיהּ, הָא לָא הֲדַר וּמַשְׁכְּנֵיהּ – לָא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara infers: The **reason** these exceptions apply is **that** he **goes back and takes it as collateral; but** if he did **not go back and take it as collateral,** these exceptions do **not** apply. This *baraita* therefore contradicts the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan, who held that the initial seizing of collateral is sufficient to grant the creditor full rights to it.


###### Bava Metzia 115a:3
[Bava Metzia 115a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/115a:3)

אָמַר רַב אַדָּא בַּר מַתְנָא: וְלָאו תָּרוֹצֵי קָא מְתָרְצַתְּ לַהּ? תָּרֵיץ הָכִי: וְכִי מֵאַחַר שֶׁמַּחְזִירִין לָמָּה מְמַשְׁכְּנִין מֵעִיקָּרָא – שֶׁלֹּא תְּהֵא שְׁבִיעִית מְשַׁמַּטְתּוֹ, וְלֹא יֵעָשֶׂה מִטַּלְטְלִין אֵצֶל בָּנָיו.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Adda bar Mattana said: And did you not resolve** this *baraita* once already by adjusting its wording slightly? **Answer** it by changing its formulation again in **this** manner: **And since** one must **return** the collateral, **why** does one **take collateral at the outset?** It is done so **that the Sabbatical** Year **should not cancel** the debt, **and** so that it **should not become movable property** in the possession **of his children.** This version is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan, as it teaches that one who has taken collateral even on a single occasion may confiscate it from the debtor’s heirs.


###### Bava Metzia 115a:4
[Bava Metzia 115a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/115a:4)

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״לֹא תָבֹא אֶל בֵּיתוֹ לַעֲבֹט עֲבֹטוֹ״. לְבֵיתוֹ אִי אַתָּה נִכְנָס, אֲבָל אַתָּה נִכְנָס לְבֵיתוֹ שֶׁל עָרֵב. וְכֵן הוּא אוֹמֵר: ״לְקַח בִּגְדוֹ כִּי עָרַב זָר וְגוֹ׳״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **The Sages taught:** The verse states: “When you lend your neighbor any manner of loan, **you shall not go into his house to take his collateral”** (Deuteronomy 24:10). This verse indicates that **you may not enter his house, but you** may **enter the house of a guarantor** to take collateral from him. **And similarly it states: “Take his garment that is a surety for a stranger”** (Proverbs 20:16).


###### Bava Metzia 115a:5
[Bava Metzia 115a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/115a:5)

וְאוֹמֵר: ״בְּנִי אִם עָרַבְתָּ לְרֵעֶךָ תָּקַעְתָּ לַזָּר כַּפֶּיךָ. נוֹקַשְׁתָּ בְאִמְרֵי פִיךָ נִלְכַּדְתָּ בְּאִמְרֵי פִיךָ. עֲשֵׂה זֹאת אֵפוֹא בְּנִי וְהִנָּצֵל כִּי בָאתָ בְכַף רֵעֶךָ לֵךְ הִתְרַפֵּס וּרְהַב רֵעֶיךָ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And it** further **states** with regard to the same issue: **“My son, if you are a guarantor for your neighbor, if you have struck your hands for a stranger, you are ensnared by the words of your mouth; you are caught by the words of your mouth. Do this, now, my son, and deliver yourself, when you have come into the hand of your friend; go humble yourself and strengthen your friend”** (Proverbs 6:1–3).


###### Bava Metzia 115a:6
[Bava Metzia 115a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/115a:6)

אִם מָמוֹן יֵשׁ לוֹ בְּיָדֶךָ – הַתֵּר לוֹ פִּיסַּת יָד, וְאִם לָאו – הַרְבֵּה עָלָיו רֵעִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
This passage in Proverbs is interpreted as follows: The phrase “You are snared by the words of your mouth” is referring to a guarantor who obligated himself to pay or one who upset his friend with his comments. In such a case, one should do the following: **If he has money in your hand,** “go humble yourself [*hitrapes*],” which is expounded as: **Release for him the palm of your hand [*hatter lo pissat yad*]** to give him his money. **And if** it is **not** money that you owe him, but rather you have “become ensnared by the words of your mouth” and owe him an apology for a personal slight, **gather together many neighbors** through which to seek **his** forgiveness.


###### Bava Metzia 115a:7
[Bava Metzia 115a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/115a:7)

לְצַד שֵׁנִי – לְבֵיתוֹ אִי אַתָּה נִכְנָס, אֲבָל אַתָּה נִכְנָס לִשְׂכַר כַּתָּף, לִשְׂכַר חַמָּר, לִשְׂכַר פּוּנְדָּק, לִשְׂכַר דְּיוֹקְנָאוֹת. יָכוֹל אֲפִילּוּ זְקָפָן עָלָיו בְּמִלְוֶה? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״מַשַּׁאת מְאוּמָה״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The verse “When you lend your neighbor any manner of loan, you shall not go into his house to take his collateral” can be interpreted **in a different direction,** i.e., in another manner: **You may not enter his house** to take collateral for the loan, **but** if he owes wages, **you may enter** and take collateral **for a porter’s wages, for a donkey driver’s wages, for an innkeeper’s payment,** or **for the wages for** one who made **drawings [*diyokanaot*]** for him. One **might** have thought that this applies **even** if the one owed the money **establishes it as a loan for** the one who owes the money after he was already liable for such payment. Therefore, **the verse states: “Any manner** of loan” (Deuteronomy 24:10), which demonstrates that once the debt has been converted into a loan, it is like any other loan, and therefore one may not take collateral against the debtor’s will.


###### Bava Metzia 115a:8
[Bava Metzia 115a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/115a:8)

**מַתְנִי׳** אַלְמָנָה, בֵּין שֶׁהִיא עֲנִיָּיה בֵּין שֶׁהִיא עֲשִׁירָה – אֵין מְמַשְׁכְּנִין אוֹתָהּ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וְלֹא תַחֲבֹל בֶּגֶד אַלְמָנָה״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** With regard to **a widow, whether she is poor** or **whether she is wealthy,** one **may not take collateral from her, as it is stated: “And you may not take the garment of a widow as collateral”** (Deuteronomy 24:17).


###### Bava Metzia 115a:9
[Bava Metzia 115a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/115a:9)

**גְּמָ׳** תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: אַלְמָנָה, בֵּין שֶׁהִיא עֲנִיָּיה בֵּין שֶׁהִיא עֲשִׁירָה – אֵין מְמַשְׁכְּנִין אוֹתָהּ, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** **The Sages taught:** With regard to **a widow, whether she is poor** or **whether she is wealthy,** one **may not take collateral from her.** This is **the statement of Rabbi Yehuda.**


###### Bava Metzia 115a:10
[Bava Metzia 115a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/115a:10)

רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: עֲשִׁירָה – מְמַשְׁכְּנִין אוֹתָהּ, עֲנִיָּיה – אֵין מְמַשְׁכְּנִין אוֹתָהּ. שֶׁאַתָּה חַיָּיב לְהַחֲזִיר לַהּ, וְאַתָּה מַשִּׂיאָהּ שֵׁם רַע בִּשְׁכֵנוֹתֶיהָ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Shimon says:** With regard to **a wealthy** widow, one may **take collateral from her.** But with regard to **a poor** widow, one may **not take collateral from her,** because **you** are **obligated to return** it **to her,** in accordance with the *halakha* that the collateral of a poor person must be returned to him whenever he needs it. **And** since you will be entering every day to return the collateral to her, **you** will thereby **give her a bad name among her neighbors,** as they will suspect her of developing an inappropriate relationship with you. By contrast, in the case of a wealthy widow, since there is no obligation to return her collateral, it is permitted to take collateral from her.


###### Bava Metzia 115a:11
[Bava Metzia 115a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/115a:11)

לְמֵימְרָא דְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה לָא דָּרֵישׁ טַעְמָא דִקְרָא, וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן דָּרֵישׁ טַעְמָא דִקְרָא? וְהָא אִיפְּכָא שָׁמְעִינַן לְהוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: Is this **to say that Rabbi Yehuda does not interpret the rationale** behind the mitzva **in the verse** and draw halakhic conclusions based on that interpretation, and **Rabbi Shimon does interpret the rationale** behind the mitzva **in the verse? But** haven’t we **heard them** holding **the reverse** opinions elsewhere?


###### Bava Metzia 115a:12
[Bava Metzia 115a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/115a:12)

דְּתַנְיָא: ״וְלֹא יַרְבֶּה לּוֹ נָשִׁים״, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: מַרְבֶּה הוּא, וּבִלְבַד שֶׁלֹּא יְהוּ מְסִירוֹת אֶת לִבּוֹ. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: אֲפִילּוּ אַחַת וְהִיא מְסִירָה אֶת לִבּוֹ, הֲרֵי זֶה לֹא יִשָּׂאֶנָּה. אִם כֵּן, מָה תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״וְלֹא יַרְבֶּה לּוֹ נָשִׁים״ – אֲפִילּוּ כַּאֲבִיגַיִל!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**As it is taught** in a mishna (*Sanhedrin* 21a) concerning the mitzvot of a king: **“And he should not multiply wives for himself,** that his heart not turn away” (Deuteronomy 17:17). **Rabbi Yehuda says: He** may **accumulate many** wives **for himself, provided that they are not** like those who **turn his heart** from reverence for God. **Rabbi Shimon says: Even one who turns his heart away, he should not marry her. If so, why is it stated: “He shall not multiply wives for himself”?** This teaches that **even** with regard to wives **like Abigail,** who was righteous and prevented David from sin (see I Samuel chapter 25), he is forbidden to have many. In this case, Rabbi Shimon does not interpret the rationale of the verse, while Rabbi Yehuda does interpret its rationale.


###### Bava Metzia 115a:13
[Bava Metzia 115a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/115a:13)

לְעוֹלָם רַבִּי יְהוּדָה לָא דָּרֵישׁ טַעְמָא דִקְרָא, וְשָׁאנֵי הָכָא, דִּמְפָרֵשׁ קְרָא ״וְלֹא יַרְבֶּה לּוֹ נָשִׁים וְלֹא יָסוּר״. מַאי טַעְמָא ״לֹא יַרְבֶּה לוֹ נָשִׁים״ – מִשּׁוּם דְּ״לֹא יָסוּר״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **Actually, Rabbi Yehuda does not** generally **interpret the rationale of the verse, and** it **is different here,** with regard to a king, **as the verse** itself **specifies** the reason: **“And he should not multiply wives for himself, that** his heart **not turn away.” What is the reason** that **he may not multiply wives for himself?** It is **because** he must ensure **that** his heart **will not turn away.**


###### Bava Metzia 115a:14
[Bava Metzia 115a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/115a:14)

וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן מִכְּדֵי בְּעָלְמָא דָּרְשִׁינַן טַעְמָא דִקְרָא, לִכְתּוֹב רַחֲמָנָא ״לֹא יַרְבֶּה״, וְלָא בָּעֵינַן ״לֹא יָסוּר״! וַאֲנָא יָדַעְנָא: מַאי טַעְמָא ״לֹא יַרְבֶּה״ – מִשּׁוּם דְּ״לֹא יָסוּר״. ״לֹא יָסוּר״ דִּכְתַב רַחֲמָנָא לְמָה לִי? אֲפִילּוּ אַחַת וּמְסִירָה אֶת לִבּוֹ – הֲרֵי זֶה לֹא יִשָּׂאֶנָּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Rabbi Shimon** maintains: **Since we generally interpret the rationale in the verse,** there is no need for the verse itself to supply the rationale for the prohibition. **Let the Merciful One state: “He may not multiply,” and we do not need** the Torah to add “that his heart **not turn away,” and I** would already **know** the answer to the question: **What is the reason** that **he may not accumulate** many wives? It is **because** of the concern that his heart **not turn away.** If so, **why do I** need the phrase “His heart **not turn away” that the Merciful One writes?** It must certainly be necessary in order to increase the scope of the prohibition: **Even** if there is **one** woman who **turns his heart away, he may not marry her.** Therefore, the verse includes two *halakhot*: A general stricture against a king’s marrying too many women, and a further *halakha* that a king may not marry even one woman who will lead him astray.


###### Bava Metzia 115a:15
[Bava Metzia 115a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/115a:15)

**מַתְנִי׳** הַחוֹבֵל אֶת הָרֵיחַיִם – עוֹבֵר מִשּׁוּם לֹא תַעֲשֶׂה, וְחַיָּיב מִשּׁוּם שְׁנֵי כֵּלִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״לֹא יַחֲבֹל רֵיחַיִם וָרָכֶב״. וְלֹא רֵיחַיִם וָרֶכֶב בִּלְבַד אָמְרוּ, אֶלָּא כׇּל דָּבָר שֶׁעוֹשִׂין בּוֹ אוֹכֶל נֶפֶשׁ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״כִּי נֶפֶשׁ הוּא חֹבֵל״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** One **who takes a millstone as collateral violates a prohibition, and** he is **liable for** taking **two vessels,** i.e., both millstones in the pair, **as it is stated: “He shall not take the lower or upper millstone as collateral”** (Deuteronomy 24:6). The *tanna* adds: **Not only** did the Sages **say** that it is prohibited to take **the lower or upper millstone** as collateral, **but** they also said that one may not take **anything that** people **use in the preparation of food [*okhel nefesh*], as it is stated: “For he takes a man’s life [*nefesh*] as collateral”** (Deuteronomy 24:6).


###### Bava Metzia 115a:16
[Bava Metzia 115a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/115a:16)

**גְּמָ׳** אָמַר רַב הוּנָא: חָבַל רֵיחַיִם – לוֹקֶה שְׁתַּיִם: מִשּׁוּם ״רֵיחַיִם״, וּמִשּׁוּם ״כִּי נֶפֶשׁ הוּא חֹבֵל״. רֵיחַיִם וָרֶכֶב – לוֹקֶה שָׁלֹשׁ: מִשּׁוּם ״רֵיחַיִם״, ״וָרֶכֶב״, וּמִשּׁוּם ״כִּי נֶפֶשׁ הוּא חֹבֵל״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** **Rav Huna says:** One who **took a lower millstone as collateral is flogged** with **two** sets of lashes: One set is **due to** violating the prohibition of taking the **lower millstone** as collateral, **and** the second is **due to: “For he takes a man’s life as collateral,”** since he took an item used in the preparation of food. If he took **the lower and upper millstone,** he **is flogged** with **three** sets of lashes: Two sets are **due to** violating the prohibitions of taking **a lower millstone and an upper millstone** as collateral, **and** the third is **due to** violating the prohibition: **“For he takes a man’s life as collateral.”**


###### Bava Metzia 115a:17
[Bava Metzia 115a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/115a:17)

וְרַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר: חָבַל רֵיחַיִם – לוֹקֶה אַחַת, וְרֶכֶב – לוֹקֶה אַחַת, רֵיחַיִם וָרֶכֶב – לוֹקֶה שְׁתַּיִם. ״כִּי נֶפֶשׁ הוּא חֹבֵל״ –

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Rav Yehuda says:** If he **took a lower millstone as collateral he is flogged** with **one** set of lashes, if he took **an upper millstone he is flogged** with **one** set of lashes, and if he took both **the lower and upper millstones** together as collateral **he is flogged** with **two** sets of lashes. With regard to the verse: **“For he takes a man’s life as collateral,”**