Previous daf

1)

(a) The Torah writes in Mishpatim "Im Kesef Talveh es Ami es he'Ani Imach".
From where does the Tana of the Beraisa learn that ...

1. ... a Jew who needs a loan has priority over a Nochri?
2. ... a poor man has priority over a rich one?
3. ... a poor man from one's own town has priority over one from another town?

(b) How does Rav Nachman quoting Rav Huna (in the second Lashon) explain the Torah's obligation to give precedence to a Jew over a Nochri? Why is that not obvious?

(c) How does Rebbi Yossi in a Beraisa extrapolate the 'blindness' of those who lend on interest, from one man, who will persecute another as if he would have struck him, when all he did was to call him a Rasha?

(d) On what two grounds do we reject the interpretation of 'Yored Imo le'Chayav' as being that he is permitted to interfere with his Parnasah?

(a) What does Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar extrapolate from the Pasuk in Tehilim "Kaspo Lo Nasan be'Neshech ... Oseh Eileh Lo Yimot Le'olam"?

(b) How does Rebbi Elazar reconcile this with the fact that there are people who lose all their money, even though they did not transgress this sin?

(c) How does he extrapolate this from the above Pasuk?

(d) What does Rav Huna extrapolate from the Pasuk in Chavakuk "Lamah Sabit Bogdim *Tachrish ke'Vala Rasha Tzadik Mimenu*"? What has this to do with the current Sugya?

(a) Rebbi, in a Beraisa, Darshens the Pasuk in Behar "ve'Chi Yamuch Achicha Imach ve'Nimkar Lach O le'Ger Toshav O le'Eiker Mishpachas Ger".
How does he interpret ...

1. ... "le'Ger Toshav"?
2. ... "Mishpachas Ger"?
3. ... "O le'Eiker"?

(b) What problem does Rebbi have with the fact that a Ger Tzedek can acquire an Eved Ivri?

(c) From where does the Tana learn that he cannot do so?

(d) And from where does he learns that ...

1. ... a Ger cannot be sold as Eved Ivri?
2. ... a woman cannot be sold as an Eved Ivri?

(a) How does Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak resolve Rebbi's problem? How can a Ger acquire an Eved Ivri in spite of the previous D'rashah?

(b) In which way does a Nirtza (who wishes to continue as an Eved until the Yovel) and an Eved who is sold to a Nochri (and a Ger Tzedek who is sold to a Jew) differ from a regular Eved Ivri who is sold to a Jew?

(c) The Tana Kama of a Beraisa permits a woman to acquire Shefachos, but not Avadim.
What does Raban Shimon ben Gamiel say?

(d) How do we reconcile Raban Shimon ben Gamliel with the previous Halachah (which prohibits a woman to acquire an Eved Ivri)?

(a) What does the Tana of the Beraisa quoted by Rav Yosef forbid an Almanah to do, besides having Talmidei-Chachamim as guests, and for the same reason?

(b) Why will the Almanah not be afraid of discovery when everyone sees how closely attached the dog is to her?

(a) Rebbi also had a problem with the Pasuk there concerning taking Ribis from a Ger Toshav "ve'Chi Yamuch Achicha u'Matah Yado Imach ve'Hechezakta Bo Ger ve'Toshav ... Al Tikach me'Ito Neshech ... ve'Chei Achicha Imach". What does a S'tam Beraisa say that seems to contradict this?

(b) Once again, it is Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak who answers Rebbi's Kashya. What does he mean when he points out that the Torah writes (not "Al Tikach *me'Itam*", but) "Al Tikach *me'Ito*"?

(c) In that case, why does the Torah insert Ger Toshav in the Pasuk?

7)

(a) What does the Tana of the Beraisa extrapolate from the Pasuk "Al Yikach me'Ito Neshech ve'Sarbis"? What does the Torah permit?

(b) Why can this not be referring to being a guarantor for a Jew? What have we learned in a Mishnah (later in the Perek) in this regard?

(c) So we establish it with reference to a Nochri who is lending a Jew. Why would that nevertheless constitute Ribis?

(d) To resolve this problem, Rav Sheishes establishes the Beraisa when the Nochri undertook to follow Jewish law (by claiming first from the borrower - see Hagahos ha'G'ra).
But surely if the Nochri undertook to follow Jewish law, he should not be taking Ribis in the first place?

(a) What does the Beraisa mean when it says ...

1. ... 'Malveh Yisrael Ma'osav shel Nochri mi'Da'as ha'Nochri'?
2. ... 'Aval Lo mi'Da'as Yisrael'?

(b) What would be the equivalent Din in the reverse case, if a Nochri borrowed money from a Yisrael on interest, and a Jew asked to borrow the money from him on the same terms? When would it be permitted and when would it be forbidden?

(c) What is the problem with the Halachah of 've'Im He'emido Eitzel Nochri Mutar' which, as we just explained, the Reisha permits?

(d) Why is this not a problem in the Seifa, which forbid the loan, even though the Nochri cannot be the Sheli'ach of a Jew?

(a) To answer this Kashya, Rav Acha B'rei de'Rav Ika establishes the Reisha when the Nochri instructed his borrower to put the money on the ground and become free of the debt.
What problem do we have with this explanation?

(b) So how does Rav Papa amend that answer?

(c) The Kashya remains however, why that is also not obvious'?
How do we answer this?

(d) Rav Ashi's answers that the preclusion of a Nochri from the institution of Shelichus is confined to Terumah, but does not extend to other Halachos.
Why is Rav Ashi's answer considered a joke?

(a) What is Rav Ashi's alternative answer? How else does he try to qualify the preclusion of a Nochri from the institution of Shelichus?

(b) What do we say to that answer?

(a) Ravina answers the original Kashya (that, since there is no Shelichus by a Nochri, it transpires that the one Yisrael is taking Ribis from the other), by differentiating between Shelichus and Zechiyah.
How does this answer the Kashya?

(b) How does he prove his point from a Katan?

(c) How do we know that 'Ein Shelichus 'le'Katan'?

(d) On what grounds do we differentiate between a Nochri and a Katan?

Next daf