Halacha
הלכה א
כְּשֶׁיּוֹרְדִין בֵּית דִּין לְנִכְסֵי הַלּוֶֹה לִגְבּוֹת מֵהֶן לֹא יִגְבּוּ לְבַעַל חוֹב אֶלָּא מִן הַבֵּינוֹנִית שֶׁבְּקַרְקְעוֹתָיו. וְדִין תּוֹרָה שֶׁיִּגְבֶּה בַּעַל חוֹב מִן הַזִּבּוּרִית שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים כד יא) "בַּחוּץ תַּעֲמֹד וְהָאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר אַתָּה נשֶׁה בוֹ יוֹצִיא" וְגוֹ' מַה דַּרְכּוֹ שֶׁל אָדָם לְהוֹצִיא פָּחוּת שֶׁבְּכֵלָיו. אֲבָל תִּקְּנוּ חֲכָמִים בְּבֵינוֹנִיּת כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא תִּנְעל דֶּלֶת בִּפְנֵי לוֹוִין. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים בְּבָא לִפָּרַע מִן הַלּוֶֹה עַצְמוֹ. אֲבָל הַבָּא לִפָּרַע מִן הַיּוֹרְשִׁין בֵּין קְטַנִּים בֵּין גְּדוֹלִים לֹא יִפָּרַע אֶלָּא מִן הַזִּבּוּרִית:
כסף משנה
1.
When the court attaches the property of a borrower to expropriate it, they should expropriate only land of intermediate quality for a lender.According to Scriptural Law, a creditor should receive only the property of inferior quality, as implied by Deuteronomy 24:11: "You shall stand outside and the person who owes you the money shall bring the security out to you." What is the tendency of a person to bring out? The least valuable of his utensils. Our Sages, however, ordained that a creditor could expropriate property of intermediate quality, so that people would not refuse to give loans.
When does the above apply? When the lender comes to collect from the borrower himself. If, however, the borrower dies, and the lender comes to collect from his heirs - whether they are below or above the age of majority -he may collect only property of inferior value.
הלכה ב
אֵין נִפְרָעִים מִנְּכָסִים מְשֻׁעְבָּדִין בְּמָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ נְכָסִים בְּנֵי חוֹרִין וַאֲפִלּוּ הָיוּ בְּנֵי חוֹרִין זִבּוּרִית וְהַמְשֻׁעְבָּדִים בֵּינוֹנִית אוֹ עִידִית בֵּין שֶׁמְּכָרָם בֵּין שֶׁנְּתָנָם. נִשְׁתַּדְּפוּ בְּנֵי חוֹרִין הֲרֵי זֶה טוֹרֵף מִן הַמְשֻׁעְבָּדִין שֶׁכֵּיוָן שֶׁנִּשְׁחֲתוּ כְּאִלּוּ אֵינָם:
כסף משנה
2.
We do not collect payment from property that has been sold, when the debtor owns property that is still in his possession. [This applies even if the property in his possession is of inferior quality, and the property that has been sold is of intermediate or superior quality, and whether the property was sold or given away as presents.If the property that has not been sold is flooded, the creditor may collect the property that has been sold. The rationale is that since it has been devastated, it is as if it no longer exists.
הלכה ג
רְאוּבֵן שֶׁמָּכַר כָּל שְׂדוֹתָיו לְשִׁמְעוֹן וְחָזַר שִׁמְעוֹן וּמָכַר שָׂדֶה אַחַת מֵהֶן לְלֵוִי וּבָא בַּעַל חוֹב שֶׁל רְאוּבֵן לִטְרֹף רָצָה מִזֶּה גּוֹבֶה רָצָה מִזֶּה גּוֹבֶה. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים כְּשֶׁלָּקַח לֵוִי בֵּינוֹנִית. אֲבָל אִם לָקַח עִידִית אוֹ זִבּוּרִית אֵינוֹ טוֹרֵף מִלֵּוִי שֶׁהֲרֵי זֶה אוֹמֵר לוֹ מִפְּנֵי זֶה טָרַחְתִּי וְלָקַחְתִּי שָׂדֶה שֶׁאֵין דִּינְךָ לִגְבּוֹת מִמֶּנּוּ. וְכֵן אִם לָקַח לֵוִי בֵּינוֹנִית וְהִנִּיחַ אֵצֶל שִׁמְעוֹן בֵּינוֹנִית כְּמוֹ הַבֵּינוֹנִית שֶׁלָּקַח אֵינוֹ טוֹרֵף מִלֵּוִי שֶׁהֲרֵי זֶה אוֹמֵר לוֹ הִנַּחְתִּי לְךָ מָקוֹם לִגְבּוֹת מִמֶּנּוּ:
כסף משנה
3.
The creditor is given the upper hand in the following situation. Reuven sold all his fields to Shimon, and Shimon sold one of his fields to Levi. If one of Reuven's creditors comes to expropriate property in payment for his debt, he may expropriate property from either Shimon or Levi.When does the above apply? When Levi purchased property of intermediate value. If, however, he purchased property that was of superior or inferior value, the creditor cannot expropriate property from Levi. For Levi will tell him: "I purposely took the trouble of purchasing a field that you have no right to expropriate, so that you would not have a claim against me." Similarly, if Levi purchased a field of intermediate worth and left Shimon a field of intermediate worth similar to the one of intermediate worth that he expropriated, the creditor cannot expropriate the field from Levi, for he will tell the creditor: "I left you property to expropriate as payment for your debt."
הלכה ד
כְּבָר בֵּאַרְנוּ שֶׁהַנִּזָּקִין שָׁמִין לָהֶן בְּעִידִית וּבַעַל חוֹב בְּבֵינוֹנִית וּכְתֻבַּת אִשָּׁה בְּזִבּוּרִית. הָיוּ לוֹ עִידִית וְזִבּוּרִית נִזָּקִין בְּעִידִית בַּעַל חוֹב [וּכְתֻבַּת אִשָּׁה] בְּזִבּוּרִית. הָיוּ לוֹ עִידִית וּבֵינוֹנִית נִזָּקִין בְּעִידִית וּבַעַל חוֹב וּכְתֻבַּת אִשָּׁה בְּבֵינוֹנִית. הָיוּ לוֹ זִבּוּרִית וּבֵינוֹנִית בִּלְבַד נִזָּקִין וּבַעַל חוֹב בְּבֵינוֹנִית וּכְתֻבַּת אִשָּׁה בְּזִבּוּרִית:
כסף משנה
4.
We have already explained that payment for damages should be expropriated from property of superior value, a lender should expropriate property of intermediate value, and the money due a woman by virtue of her ketubah should be expropriated from property of inferior value.When a person owns only property of superior value and property of inferior value, damages should be expropriated from the property of superior value, and a lender and a woman collecting the money due her by virtue of her ketubah should expropriate the property of inferior value.
If he owns only property of superior value and property of intermediate value, damages should be expropriated from the property of superior value, and a lender and a woman collecting the money due her by virtue of her ketubah should expropriate the property of intermediate value.
If he owns only property of inferior value and property of intermediate value, damages and payment for a loan should be expropriated from the property of intermediate value, and a woman collecting the money due her by virtue of her ketubah should expropriate the property of inferior value.
הלכה ה
מְכָרָן לִשְׁלֹשָׁה בְּנֵי אָדָם בְּבַת אַחַת הֲרֵי כֻּלָּן נִכְנְסוּ תַּחַת הַבְּעָלִים וְהַנִּזָּקִין טוֹרְפִין מִן הָעִידִית וּבַעַל חוֹב טוֹרֵף מִן הַבֵּינוֹנִית וּכְתֻבַּת אִשָּׁה טוֹרֶפֶת מִן הַזִּבּוּרִית. מְכָרָן לָזֶה אַחַר זֶה כֻּלָּן טוֹרְפִין מִן הָאַחֲרוֹן. לֹא הִסְפִּיק טוֹרְפִין מִשֶּׁלְּפָנָיו. לֹא הִסְפִּיק טוֹרְפִין מִשֶּׁלִּפְנֵי פָנָיו. אֲפִלּוּ הָיָה הָאַחֲרוֹן הוּא שֶׁלָּקַח הַזִּבּוּרִית שֶׁהֲרֵי הַלּוֹקֵחַ הַקּוֹדֵם אוֹמֵר לַטּוֹרֵף הִנַּחְתִּי לְךָ מָקוֹם לִגְבּוֹת מִמֶּנּוּ:
כסף משנה
5.
When a person owns three fields and he sells them to three people at the same time, they all take the place of the previous owner. Thus, payment for damages should be expropriated from property of superior value, a lender should expropriate property of intermediate value and the money due a woman by virtue of her ketubah should be expropriated from property of inferior value.If he sold them one after the other, they should all expropriate their due from the last purchaser. If the worth of that property was not sufficient, they should expropriate from the property purchased before it. If the worth of that property was also not sufficient, they should expropriate from the property purchased first.
This applies even if the last purchaser acquired the property of inferior quality. For the purchaser who preceded him can tell the person who seeks to expropriate property: "I left you property from which you could collect your debt."
הלכה ו
מְכָרָן לְאֶחָד זוֹ אַחַר זוֹ הֲרֵי הַלּוֹקֵחַ נִכְנָס תַּחַת הַבְּעָלִים. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים שֶׁלָּקַח עִידִית בָּאַחֲרוֹנָה אֲבָל לָקַח זִבּוּרִית בָּאַחֲרוֹנָה כֻּלָּן גּוֹבִין מִן הַזִּבּוּרִית שֶׁהֲרֵי אוֹמֵר לַטּוֹרֵף כְּשֶׁיָּבוֹא לִגְבּוֹת מִן הַשָּׂדֶה שֶׁלָּקַח תְּחִלָּה הֲרֵי הִנַּחְתִּי לְךָ מָקוֹם לִגְבּוֹת מִמֶּנּוּ. וְלָמָּה אֵינוֹ אוֹמֵר לוֹ הַטּוֹרֵף כָּךְ אִם לָקַח עִידִית בָּאַחֲרוֹנָה וְתִגְבֶּה הָאִשָּׁה וּבַעַל חוֹב מִן הָעִידִית שֶׁלָּקַח בָּאַחֲרוֹנָה. שֶׁזּוֹ תַּקָּנָה הִיא לַלּוֹקֵחַ וַהֲרֵי אוֹמֵר לוֹקֵחַ לָהֶן אִי אֶפְשִׁי בְּתַקָּנָה זוֹ אֶלָּא כָּל אֶחָד מִכֶּם יִגְבֶּה מִן הָרָאוּי לוֹ:
כסף משנה
6.
When a debtor sells all of his properties to one person, one after the other, that person takes the place of the original owner.When does the above apply? When he purchased the property of superior quality last. When, however, he purchased the property of inferior quality last, all the creditors must collect their due from that property. For when a person comes to expropriate property, the purchaser will tell him: "I left you property from which you can collect your debt."
Why does the creditor not tell this to a person who seeks to expropriate the property when he purchased the property of superior value first, and thus a woman collecting the money due her by virtue of her ketubah and a lender would also expropriate their due from the property of superior value? Because this possibility is an ordinance instituted for the sake of the purchaser. And he will tell them: "I cannot accept this ordinance." Instead, each type of creditor will collect from the property fit for him.
הלכה ז
מְכָרָן לְאֶחָד זוֹ אַחַר זוֹ וּמָכַר לוֹ עִידִית בָּאַחֲרוֹנָה וְחָזַר הַלּוֹקֵחַ וּמָכַר זִבּוּרִית וּבֵינוֹנִית וְשִׁיֵּר עִידִית לְפָנָיו כֻּלָּן גּוֹבִין מִן הָעִידִית שֶׁהֲרֵי אֵין לוֹ בְּמָה יִדְחֶה אוֹתָם. מָכַר עִידִית וְהִנִּיחַ בֵּינוֹנִית וְזִבּוּרִית הַנִּזָּקִין טוֹרְפִין מִן הָעִידִית שֶׁבְּיַד לוֹקֵחַ הַשֵּׁנִי וּבַעַל חוֹב וּכְתֻבַּת אִשָּׁה גּוֹבִין מִבֵּינוֹנִית וְזִבּוּרִית שֶׁשִּׁיֵּר לְפָנָיו:
כסף משנה
7.
Similarly, the following laws apply when the debtor sold all his properties to one person, one after the other, selling him the property of superior value last, and that purchaser sold the property of inferior and intermediate value to a third party and retained the property of superior value for himself. All the debtors collect their due from the property of superior value, for the purchaser does not have any property from the original debtor to divert them to.When the purchaser sold the property of superior value and retained the properties of inferior and intermediate value, payment for damages should be expropriated from property of superior value in the possession of the second purchaser. The debt owed a lender and the money due a woman by virtue of her ketubah should be expropriated from the property of intermediate and inferior value that the first purchaser retained.
הלכה ח
מִי שֶׁלָּוָה מֵאֶחָד וְאַחַר כָּךְ מָכַר הַלּוֶֹה נְכָסָיו לִשְׁנַיִם וְכָתַב בַּעַל חוֹב לְלוֹקֵחַ שֵׁנִי דִּין וּדְבָרִים אֵין לִי עִמְּךָ וְקָנוּ מִיָּדוֹ אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לִטְרֹף מִלּוֹקֵחַ רִאשׁוֹן שֶׁהֲרֵי אוֹמֵר לוֹ הִנַּחְתִּי לְךָ מָקוֹם לִגְבּוֹת מִמֶּנּוּ אֵצֶל בַּעַל חוֹבְךָ מִן הַנְּכָסִים שֶׁקָּנָה לוֹקֵחַ שֵׁנִי אַחֲרַי וְאַתָּה הִפְסַדְתָּ עַל עַצְמְךָ שֶׁהֲרֵי סִלַּקְתָּ עַצְמְךָ מֵהֶן. וְהוּא הַדִּין לְאִשָּׁה בִּכְתֻבָּתָהּ אִם כָּתְבָה לַשֵּׁנִי. אִבְּדָה כְּתֻבָּתָהּ וְאֵינָהּ יְכוֹלָה לִטְרֹף. אֲבָל אִם כָּתְבוּ לָרִאשׁוֹן טוֹרְפִין מִן הַשֵּׁנִי. מָכַר הַלּוֶֹה שָׂדֶה לַלּוֹקֵחַ וּמְכָרָהּ לוֹקֵחַ רִאשׁוֹן לְלוֹקֵחַ שֵׁנִי וְכָתַב הַמַּלְוֶה לְלוֹקֵחַ רִאשׁוֹן דִּין וּדְבָרִים אֵין לִי עִמְּךָ וְקָנוּ מִיָּדוֹ הֲרֵי בַּעַל חוֹב טוֹרֵף מִלּוֹקֵחַ שֵׁנִי אוֹתָהּ הַשָּׂדֶה וְלוֹקֵחַ רִאשׁוֹן טוֹרֵף אוֹתָהּ מִבַּעַל חוֹב שֶׁהֲרֵי כָּתַב לוֹ וְלוֹקֵחַ שֵׁנִי טוֹרֵף אוֹתָהּ מִלּוֹקֵחַ רִאשׁוֹן שֶׁהֲרֵי הוּא מְכָרָהּ לוֹ וּבַעַל חוֹב חוֹזֵר וְטוֹרֵף מִשֵּׁנִי וְחוֹזְרִין חֲלִילָה עַד שֶׁיַּעֲשׂוּ פְּשָׁרָה בֵּינֵיהֶן. וְכֵן הָאִשָּׁה בִּכְתֻבָּתָהּ:
כסף משנה
8.
As reflected in the following situation, when a person limits his power to expropriate property, his waiver may extend beyond his original intent: One person borrowed money from a colleague. Afterwards, the borrower sold his property to two people each person purchasing a portion for himself, one after the other. The creditor wrote to the second purchaser, pledging that he would not expropriate the property as payment for the debt and affirmed his commitment with a kinyan. Our Sages ruled that he is also not able to expropriate the property sold to the first purchaser. For that purchaser will say to the creditor: "I left you the opportunity of collecting the money owed you from the debtor by expropriating the property that the second purchaser bought after I did. You caused yourself a loss by removing your lien on it."Similar laws apply with regard to a woman who seeks to collect the money due her by virtue of her ketubah. If she writes such a waiver to the second purchaser, she loses the right to the money due her by virtue of her ketubah and cannot expropriate property. If, however, such persons write such a waiver to the first purchaser, they may expropriate the property from the second purchaser.
The following situation can occur when a borrower sells a field to a purchaser and then the purchaser sells it to a second purchaser. The lender writes to the first purchaser, pledging that he would not expropriate the property as payment for the debt and affirms his commitment with a kinyan. The creditor may expropriate the property from the second purchaser. The first purchaser may expropriate the property from the creditor, because he pledged that he would not expropriate the property, and he did. The second purchaser can then expropriate the property from the first purchaser, because he sold it to him. The creditor may then expropriate the property again from the second purchaser, and the cycle continues until they arrange a compromise.
Similar laws apply with regard to a woman who seeks to collect the money due her by virtue of her ketubah and makes a pledge to the person who purchased her husband's property.