Bava Metzia 114b (קיד:) — the Talmud in English

Rabba bar Avuha further asked Elijah:

From where is it derived that

a person who is standing

naked may not separate

teruma?

Elijah said to him:

As it is written

[Deuteronomy 23] “

And there shall not be seen among you a nakedness of anything,”

which indicates: At the time when you speak of it, there shall not be seen among you a nakedness of anything. And since teruma requires a blessing, it is prohibited to separate teruma while naked.

Rabba bar Avuha said to

Elijah: But

is

my master not a kohen!

And

for what reason is my master standing in a cemetery?

Elijah said

to Rabba: Surely

my master has not studied the order

of

Tahorot?

As it was taught in a beraita: Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai says: The graves of gentiles do not impart ritual impurity, as it is stated

[Ezekiel 34]

“And you, My sheep, the sheep of My pasture, are human beings.”

And we derive: Only

you are called “human beings,” whereas gentiles are not called human beings.

And since it is stated [Numbers 19:14]: “When a person dies in a tent, whoever enters the tent and whatever is in the tent shall be impure for seven days,” we learn from this that impurity imparted by a corpse applies only to one who is called a human being, namely, a Jew, but not to a gentile. Therefore, the graves of gentiles do not impart ritual impurity.

Rabba bar Avuha said

to Elijah: If

in the four

orders that are relevant to practical halakha [namely, Moed, Nashim, Nezikin, and Kodashim] I still

cannot

remember them properly, is it possible that

in

the other

six

orders of the Mishna, which are not practiced in the Diaspora [namely, Zeraim and Tahorot,

I can

remember them!?

Elijah said

to him:

And why not?

Rabba bar Avuha said

to Elijah:

I am hard-pressed by circumstances;

I am not familiar with them because of the difficulty of earning a livelihood.

In response to his words,

Elijah took Rabba bar Avuha with him

and brought him

up

to the Garden of Eden.

Elijah said

to him:

Spread out

your

cloak

,

and

gather,

collect

and place

inside it

some of these leaves,

leaves that grow there.

He gathered,

Rabba bar Avuha gathered, and

placed

some of those leaves into his cloak.

When he was leaving,

when he wished to return,

he heard

a

voice saying: Who is eating his world in the World to Come,

meaning, who is consuming in this world the reward of his World to Come,

like Rabba bar Avuha?

Immediately,

he shook out

the leaves from his cloak and

threw them away,

so as not to derive benefit from the reward stored up for him in the World to Come.

Even so,

when

he brought his cloak,

he found that

the

the

cloak had absorbed a fragrance

from the leaves that had been in it.

He sold

his cloak

for twelve thousand dinars,

and since he did not wish to derive benefit from his World to Come,

he divided it

—he divided the money—

among his sons-in-law .

The Sages taught: It is stated [Deuteronomy 24]:

“And if he is a poor man, you shall not sleep with his pledge,”

indicating that

this

applies to the pledge of

a rich man: if he sleeps,

it is permitted for the lender to use it.

And we raise an objection:

What is he saying?

If the lender uses the pledge of the wealthy borrower, he violates the prohibition of interest, since in addition to repayment of the debt by the borrower, he receives use of his cloak as compensation for the loan .

Rav Sheshet said: This is what he is saying: “And if he is a poor man, you shall not sleep with his pledge; it shall be with you,”

for this implies:

but in the case of a rich man, if he sleeps and his pledge is with you ,

although he may retain the pledge, it is prohibited to use it, whether the borrower is poor or wealthy.

The Sages taught: One who lends money to another

without taking a pledge, and the time for repayment arrives,

may not take a pledge from him,

but he must summon him to court, and the court will send its agent to take a pledge from him.

And

if the lender transgressed and took a pledge,

he is not obligated to return it to him, but he violates

the lender

all of these names

: “You shall surely return his pledge to him when the sun sets” [Deuteronomy 24:13]; and if he is poor, he violates “you shall not sleep with his pledge” [ibid., 12]; “If you take your fellow’s garment as a pledge, you shall return it to him before the sun sets” [Exodus 22:25].

And we raise an objection:

What is he saying?

You said that if he transgressed and took a pledge, he is not obligated to return it to him. If so, why does the lender violate all of these names?

Rav Sheshet said:

Do not say that if he transgressed and took a pledge he is not obligated to return it to him. Rather,

this is what he is saying: One who lends money to another may not

enter his house

to take a pledge from him.

And if

he transgressed

and took a pledge, he is obligated to return it to him

when the borrower needs it .

And

that which it teaches

that he violates all of these names

refers

to the latter clause,

if he transgressed and took the pledge but did not return it to him.

Rava said:

We should indeed read: “If he transgressed and took a pledge, he is not obligated to return it to the borrower.”

And this is what he is saying: One who lends money to another may not take a pledge from him.

And if

he transgressed

and took a pledge, he is obligated to return it to him

when he needs to use his utensils.

When are these words stated? When he took a pledge

the lender

not at the time of the loan,

but only when the repayment date arrived did he take a pledge from him.

But

if he

took a pledge

already

at the time of the loan, he is not obligated to return it to him,

even when the borrower needs it .

And

that which it teaches that the lender

violates all of these names

refers

to the first clause,

which teaches that if he transgressed and took a pledge, he is obligated to return it to him. And it is speaking of a pledge taken not at the time of the loan: If he did not return the pledge when the borrower needed it, he violates all of these names.

Rav Shizevi taught before Rava:

That which is written, “If you take your fellow’s garment as a pledge,

before the sun sets

you shall return it to him”

[Exodus 22:25]—

this refers to a night garment,

which the lender must return before the sun sets, meaning that he returns the night garment in the morning, and it remains in the borrower’s possession until the sun sets. And that which is written,

“You shall surely return his pledge to him when the sun sets,” this refers to a day garment,

which the lender must return to the borrower at sunset, when the sun sets.

Rava said

to Rav Shizevi: What need does the borrower have for a garment

during the day at night,

and

why do I need

to return it if the borrower cannot use it?

And

likewise, a garment

of the night during the day—why do I need

it? Rav Shizevi said

to him:

Should I erase it,

should I remove this beraita from my teaching?

Rava said

to him:

No,

do not remove it. The tanna of the beraita who says that a day garment is returned at night was not speaking of a garment suitable for wearing during the day, but of a garment suitable for being taken as a pledge during the day, which is in fact a night garment, and the lender must return it toward nightfall. Likewise, a night garment means a garment suitable for being taken as a pledge at night, since it is in fact a day garment. Therefore, he returns it toward daytime .

And

this is what he is saying:

That which is written,

“Before the sun sets

you shall return it to him”—this refers to a day garment that was given to be taken as a pledge at night,

and the lender must return it to the borrower so that it will be in his possession until the sun sets, because this is a day garment.

And that which is written,

“You shall surely return his pledge to him when the sun sets”—this refers to a night garment that was given to be taken as a pledge during the day .

from a borrower

Rabbi Yoḥanan said:

A lender who

took a pledge

from the borrower

and the borrower died,

is not obligated to return the pledge when the orphans need to use it. Rather,

he removes it

for himself

from upon the borrower’s sons

—the borrower’s heirs.

The reason is that the lender acquires the pledge when he first takes possession of it, and it is thereby liened to him. The Torah imposed upon the lender the obligation to return the pledge to the borrower when he needs it, but when the borrower dies, the Torah did not impose upon him an obligation to return the pledge to his sons.

A challenge is raised: Rabbi Meir said: Since

according to Torah law one

takes a pledge

from the borrower,

why do they return

the pledge to him when he needs it?

Yet one must wonder about Rabbi Meir’s question: What difficulty does he find with

“Why do they return it”?

For

the Merciful One said

that one may take a pledge, but if the borrower needs the pledge,

return it

to him.

Rather,

necessarily, this is what Rabbi Meir found difficult:

Since

according to Torah law they

return

the pledge when the borrower needs it,