Arakhin 22b — the Talmud in English

And we challenge Rav Pappa, who holds that the reason that the court does not attend to the property is because of a mitzva:

We learned

in our Mishna:

The valuation of orphans’ property is for thirty days, and the valuation of consecrated property is for sixty days, and they announce in the morning and in the evening

, and it is thereby proven that they do attend to the property of minor orphans.

And with what are we dealing? If you say with a gentile creditor

, who does not wish to wait until they grow up, and therefore the court attends to the property,

will he obey

[that is, will he heed our words] to wait through the days of the announcement and not collect? And if so, what relevance is there to an announcement?!

Rather, it is obvious

that it is dealing

with a Jewish creditor

, and if so, why do they attend to the property of minor orphans?

And we explain the challenge:

Granted, according to Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua

, who holds that the reason that the court does not attend to the property is because of tzareri,

he establishes it when he is liable

[that is, when the orphans’ father]

admits

at the time of his death that he is still liable, and therefore they attend to the property!

But according to Rav Pappa

, who holds that the reason that the court does not attend to the property is because of a mitzva, and even when it is certain that he did not repay, they do not attend to the property—

it is difficult!

And we answer:

Rav Pappa can say to you:

a.

If you wish, say

that our Mishna is to be explained as dealing with collecting a

marriage settlement

for a woman; and a marriage settlement is collected

because of ḥina

, the favor that men find in the eyes of women, by virtue of her collecting her marriage settlement even from minor orphans.

b.

And if you wish, say

that our Mishna is to be explained as we explained initially:

with a gentile creditor

, who is unwilling to wait until they grow up, and therefore the court attends to his claim. And regarding what we challenged—that if so, he should not wait even for the period of the announcement—here it is dealing

with one who accepted upon himself

the gentile

to be judged according to Jewish law

, under which an announcement is made; therefore he is willing to wait throughout the entire period of the announcement.

And we challenge the latter resolution:

If

it is so, that he

accepted upon himself

to be judged according to Jewish law, then he also accepts upon himself the Jewish law that the court does not attend to the property of minor orphans; and if so,

let him wait for them until they grow up

[and not attend to the minor orphans]?

And we answer: It is dealing with a gentile creditor

who accepted this

—to wait for the period of the announcement—

but did not accept this

—

not to attend to the property of minor orphans—and therefore the court attends to it. [The explanation of the Gemara was elucidated according to the meaning of Rashi and the Rosh in the Shita Mekubetzet.]

We again challenge Rav Pappa:

Come and hear

the aforementioned beraita: “And he says [the announcer], etc.”:

“On condition that I give the woman”—

her marriage settlement, and the creditor—

his debt

: this field of the orphans is being sold. Thus, the court attends to the property of minor orphans in order to collect from it. And

with what are we dealing? If you say with a gentile creditor

, who does not wish to wait until they grow up, and therefore the court attends to the property,

will he obey

and wait through the period of the announcement and not collect? And if so, what relevance is there to an announcement?!

Rather, it is obvious: with a Jewish creditor

, and if so, why does the court attend to the property?

And we explain the challenge:

Granted, according to Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, he establishes it when the debtor admits

that he is still liable!

But according to Rav Pappa

, who says that the court does not attend even when the debtor admits,

granted

—that which is written in the beraita, that they collect for the woman

her marriage settlement

from their property, is not difficult for Rav Pappa, because in the case of a marriage settlement the court does attend

because of ḥina; but in the case of a creditor, it is difficult!

And we answer:

Actually

, as we explained initially,

with a gentile creditor

who does not wish to wait until they grow up, and therefore the court attends to the property; rather,

for example, when he accepted upon himself to be judged according to Jewish law

, under which they make an announcement, and therefore an announcement is relevant.

And we challenge:

If he accepted upon himself, let him wait for them

also

until they grow up

—the orphans—and why does the court attend to the property?

And we answer:

He accepted this

—the law of the announcement—

but did not accept this

—to wait until they grow up—and therefore the court attends to the property!

Rava said

a third reason for the law that the court does not attend to the property of minor orphans:

because of a receipt

, meaning: we are concerned that perhaps the document was paid, and the creditor gave the orphans’ father a receipt attesting that it was paid, but the orphans do not know where it is; therefore the court does not attend to the property.

Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, said to Rava: Are we concerned about a receipt?!

But we learned

: A divorced woman

who collects

her marriage settlement from her husband’s property

not in his presence

, for example, when he sent her a bill of divorce from overseas,

may collect only with an oath

that she did not receive her marriage settlement; and with an oath, in any event, she collects.

And

regarding this Mishna

Rabbi Aḥa, minister of the capital

[this was his appellation]

said: “An incident came before Rabbi Yitzḥak Nappaḥa in Antioch, and he said: They taught

in this Mishna that she collects by means of an oath, and the court descends to a person’s property when he is not present,

only in the case of a woman’s marriage settlement, because of ḥina!

so that men will find favor in the eyes of women—by virtue of her collecting her marriage settlement even when he is not present—and they will marry them.

But a creditor

who comes to collect from the property of one who owes him, even with an oath,

may not

collect, and the court does not descend to his property until he returns.

And Rava said in the name of Rav Naḥman

, disagreeing:

Even a creditor as well

may collect [with an oath] when he is not present.

And now we challenge:

And if you are concerned

when one comes to collect from the property of minor orphans

about a receipt

, and therefore the court does not attend to their property even with an oath,

there as well -

in the case of a creditor who comes to collect from the property of one who owes him when he is not present—

let us be concerned

about repayment, and let us be concerned that he has a receipt in his possession attesting to the repayment; and why did Rava say in the name of Rav Naḥman that he collects with an oath when he is not present?

And we answer:

He said to him

Rava to Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua:

There

, when a creditor comes to collect when he is not present, concerning which we said that he collects and we are not concerned about repayment and a receipt,

as we said the reason: so that everyone should not take his fellow’s money

as a loan

and go and settle in an overseas country

[and you will lock the door before borrowers—Gemara, Ketubot 88].

Rava said: The law is: The court does not attend to the property of orphans

who are minors, except when the debtor admits, or when they excommunicated him and he died under his excommunication, because we are concerned about a receipt.

And if he said

the father before his death:

Give

to so-and-so in payment of my debt—

they attend to the property

, for this is an admission by the debtor.

The father said: Give

this field and this maneh

[or a maneh]

this

to so-and-so against my debt—

they attend to the property

to pay him,

and

even

they do not appoint a guardian

to investigate: perhaps, although the father said “Give,” he had already paid him, but forgot. Since the father designated this field and this maneh, it is certainly clear to the father that he did not pay, and there is no concern at all.

But if the father said: Give

an unspecified field and an unspecified maneh

to so-and-so against my debt—

they attend to the property and appoint a guardian

, for there is concern that the father had already paid him in the presence of witnesses or had written him a receipt, and now forgot; therefore they appoint a guardian in order to investigate the matter. And Rashi explained: They appoint a guardian in order to select a good portion for the orphans, and to collect from the inferior property for the creditor.

The Sages of Nehardea said

in disagreement with Rava:

In all of them

, even “this maneh” and “this field,”

they attend to the property and appoint a guardian, except

[apart]

when there is found

among the orphans

a field that is not his

[belonging to their father], since the witnesses testify that it is stolen property in his possession, they remove it, and they do not appoint a guardian to attempt to find witnesses to contradict these witnesses,

for

since they now testify that it is stolen,

to establish witnesses as liars

[to establish the witnesses as lying]

we do not establish!

Rav Ashi said: Therefore, attending

to the property of minor orphans

we do not attend, for Rava said the law is: The court does not attend!

And if we do attend

[and when we attend]—for example, when the debtor admits, or when they excommunicated him and he died under his excommunication, or when he said “Give,” whether “this field” or an unspecified field—

we appoint

[they appoint]

a guardian, for the Sages of Nehardea said: In all of them they attend and appoint a guardian, except when there is found a field that is not his, for we do not establish witnesses as liars!

[This was explained according to the Ran, Ketubot 59 in the pages of the Rif.]