Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) WHEN IS A GUARANTOR OBLIGATED?

(a) All agree that a guarantor for a Kesuvah is not obligated.
(b) All agree that a Kablan for a loan is obligated.
(c) There is a dispute regarding a guarantor for a loan and a Kablan for a Kesuvah.

1. Some say that he is obligated even if the borrower has no property;
2. Others say that he is obligated only if the borrower has property.
3. The law is, in all cases he is obligated, even if the borrower has no property, except for a guarantor for a Kesuvah.

i. In that case, even if the husband has property, the guarantor is not obligated.
ii. Question: Why is he exempt?
iii. Answer: The woman is not losing any money, so the guarantor is not accepting responsibility - he feels that he is merely doing a Mitzvah (to encourage the marriage).

(d) Question (against Mar Zutra (49B 4:b) - Ravina): Looking at the source of the enactment of collecting a Kesuvah from Ziburis decides the issue.

1. We learned (in the Beraisa - 49B 3:a:4:i) that this is because the woman wants to marry more than the man does.
2. If she only collects Ziburis from orphans - the reason would be, because she is collecting from orphans!

i. Mar Zutra is refuted.

(a) (Mar Zutra brei d'Rav Nachman): A loan document brought for payment from orphans - even though it promises that the lender may collect from Idis, he only collects from Ziburis.

1. Support (Abaye): This is as we see by a normal creditor, who normally collects from Beinonis, and collects Ziburis from orphans.
2. Rejection (Rava): That is no proof, for mid'Oraisa, a creditor is only entitled to Ziburis, as Ula taught!

i. (Ula): mid'Oraisa, a creditor collects Ziburis - "You will stand outside, and the borrower (will give you a pledge)."
ii. It is normal that the borrower will give the lowest quality vessel.
iii. Chachamim enacted that a creditor collects Beinonis, in order that borrowers will find people to lend them.
iv. Regarding orphans, no enactment was made, the creditor collects from Ziburis as the Torah says.

3. (Culmination of rejection): But here, mid'Oraisa the creditor collects from Idis (by the stipulation) - even from orphans, he collects Idis!

(b) Question (against Rava - Avraham Chuza'ah - Beraisa): Only Ziburis may be collected from orphans, even for damages.

1. mid'Oraisa, damages are collected from Idis (so this is as our case)!

(c) Answer: The case is, the damager's Ziburis is as the victim's Idis; the Beraisa is as R. Yishmael.

1. R. Yishmael says that mid'Oraisa, the damager must pay with land as good as the Idis of the victim. It was an enactment to make him pay with his own Idis - this enactment was not made by orphans.

(d) Question (against Rava - R. Eliezer Niyusah - Beraisa): We only collect from Ziburis of orphans, even if they are Idis!

1. Question: What does it mean, 'even if they are Idis'?

i. Suggestion: Even if the document says that the lender may collect from Idis.

(e) [Version #1 - Rashi - Answer: No - it means, even if the borrower had Idis, but no longer has it;

1. This is as Rava's law.
2. (Rava): One who damages Ziburis, if he pays for this with land, he pays Idis; if the Idis is gone, he pays Beinonis.
3. When orphans must pay, we make no enactment; mid'Oraisa, they pay Ziburis.]

(f) [Version #2 - Tosfos - Answer: No - it means, even if orphans damaged a man's property on the river bank (he only collects from Ziburis).

1. This is as Rava's law.
2. (Rava): One who damages Ziburis, if he pays for this with land, he pays Idis; if he damages riverbank property, he pays Beinonis.
3. When orphans damage, we make no enactment; mid'Oraisa, they pay Ziburis.]

(g) (Mishnah): When we collect land from orphans, we collect Ziburis.
(h) Question (Rav Achdevoy bar Ami): Does this refer only to minors, or even adult orphans?

1. Is the law an enactment to help small orphans, and it was not enacted for adults?
2. Or, is it because a lender does not expect the borrower to die, so people will lend money, even without an enactment to collect from Beinonis of orphans? (This applies equally to minors and adults.)

(i) Answer (Abaye Kashisha - Beraisa): Chachamim referred even to adult orphans, all the more so to minors.
(j) Rejection: Perhaps that is only regarding the oath imposed on one who collects from orphans, since even adult orphans do not know about their father's affairs - but regarding Ziburis, this is only for minors!

1. The law is, the enactments of the oath and Ziburis apply to minor and adult orphans.

(a) (Mishnah): We do not collect from mortgaged property if there is unmortgaged property.
(b) Question (Rav Achdevoy bar Ami): Does this apply to a gift (a debtor gave a gift, and still has unmortgaged property - do we collect from a gift)?

1. Was this an enactment so that buyers should not lose - if the gift is taken, the receiver did not lose, so no enactment was made?
2. Or - do we say, surely the receiver benefited the giver, if he loses the gift, it is as a loss!

(c) Answer (Mar Kashisha brei d'Rav Chisda - Beraisa): A dying man said, give 200 Zuz to Reuven, 300 to Shimon, and 400 to Levi - we do not say, they collect in order of the documents (and if there is not enough to pay all the gifts, the latter recipients do not collect);

1. Therefore, if a loan document is collected from the estate, it is collected from all of them.
2. If he said, give 200 Zuz to Reuven; after him, to Shimon; after him, to Levi - they collect in the order of the documents;
3. Therefore, if a loan document is collected from the estate, it is collected from the last recipient; if he did not inherit enough, from the previous recipient...
4. Even if the first recipient received Beinonis, and the last received Ziburis, the loan is collected from the Ziburis (for this was the last unmortgaged land by the borrower).

i. This shows, the enactment was also made by recipients of gifts!

(d) Rejection #1: No - the case is, Reuven, Shimon and Levi did not get gifts - they were creditors being paid up!

1. Question: But the Beraisa says 'Give'!
2. Answer: It means 'Give the money I owe'.
3. Question: The creditor with the earliest document should be paid first (when the dying man specified an order, why do we follow his order)?
4. Answer: The case is, the creditors have no documents.
5. Objection: But the Beraisa says, they collect in the order of the documents!
6. Answer: No, it means whoever is mentioned first in the document detailing the command of the dying man.

(e) Rejection #2: Really, a creditor takes Beinonis no matter who received it;

1. The Beraisa speaks of taking from the last one, for he always suffers the loss (since when a previous one loses land, he is compensated by the latter recipients).

(f) Rejection #3: The Beraisa speaks when all lands are the same quality. (But if they were not, the creditor would receive Beinonis, even if it was not by the last recipient!)

(a) (Mishnah): We do not collect for consumed fruit (from mortgaged property). (b) Question: Why not?
(c) Answer #1 (Ula): Because the obligation to pay for the fruit was never written in a document.

1. Question (R. Aba): But the food of a widow and daughters - it is as if they are written, yet the Mishnah says that they do not collect from mortgaged property!
2. Answer (Ula): It was enacted that they are considered written only regarding collecting from unmortgaged property, not regarding mortgaged property.
3. R. Zeira asked the same question of Rav Asi (who holds as R. Aba) and received the same answer.

(d) Answer #2 (R. Chanina ): Because the obligation to pay fruit has no limit.
(e) Question: Does R. Chanina also require that the debt be written, or is it sufficient that it has a limit?