Nedarim 66

דברי חנן היא

Hanan's view.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is explained further on. ');">¹</span>

רבא אמר אפילו תימא דברי הכל גבי מודר הנאה דיהיב על מנת שלא לפרוע

Raba said: You may even say that it agrees with all: [We suppose that] the man who is interdicted by vow not to benefit from his neighbour was lent [money] without obligation to repay.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The creditor having lent it to be repaid at the debtor's leisure (Ran). Therefore, when his neighbour repays his debt, he confers no benefit upon him. Similarly, he may pay his shekel only when he is not bound to pay it himself, e.g., if he had already sent it and it was lost on the road. ');">²</span>

מאי חנן דתנן מי שהלך למדינת הים ועמד אחד ופירנס את אשתו חנן אמר איבד את מעותיו

What is [the ruling of] Hanan? — We learnt: If a man departed overseas, and another arose and supported his wife: Hanan said: He has lost his money.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' He has no claim upon the husband. ');">³</span>

נחלקו עליו בני כהנים גדולים ואמרו ישבע כמה הוציא ויטול אמר רבי דוסא בן הרכינס כדבריהם אמר רבן יוחנן בן זכאי יפה אמר חנן הניח מעותיו על קרן הצבי

But the sons of the High priests<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' There was a special court of priests, and this may be referred to here; v. Keth. 104b. ');">⁴</span>

רבא לא אמר כרב הושעיא דקא מוקים לה למתניתין כדברי הכל רב הושעיא לא אמר כרבא גזירה שלא ליפרע משום ליפרע

disputed this and maintained: He must swear how much he expended and is reimbursed [by the husband]. R. Dosa b. Harkinas ruled as they did; whilst R. Johanan b. Zakkai said: Hanan has ruled well — it is as though he had placed his money upon a deer's horn.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., he cannot expect its return. ');">⁵</span>

מחזיר לו את אבידתו פליגי בה רבי אמי ורבי אסי חד אמר לא שנו אלא בשנכסי מחזיר אסורין על בעל אבידה דכי מהדר ליה מידעם דנפשיה קא מהדר ליה אבל נכסי בעל אבידה אסורין על מחזיר לא קא מהדר ליה דקא מהני ליה פרוטה דרב יוסף

Now, Raba did not say as R. Hoshaia, because he interpreted our Mishnah to harmonize with all views. R. Hoshaia did not say as Raba: [to settle a debt] that need not be repaid is forbidden as a preventive measure on account of [a debt] that must be repaid.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lest it be thought that the latter too may be settled. ');">⁶</span>

וחד אמר אפילו נכסי בעל אבידה אסורין על מחזיר מהדר ליה ומשום פרוטה דרב יוסף לא שכיח

AND RETURN A LOST ARTICLE TO HIM. R. Ammi and R. Assi [differ thereon] — one said: This is only when the property of the finder<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'restorer'. ');">⁷</span> is forbidden to the loser, so that in returning it to him, he returns what is his own.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So that the loser is not benefiting. ');">⁸</span> But if the property of the loser is forbidden to the finder, he may not return it, because he benefits him by R. Joseph's <i>perutah</i>.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since when a person is engaged in the performance of one precept, he is exempt from another, the finder, when fulfilling this precept, may decline to give a perutah of charity to a poor man. This is referred to as R. Joseph's perutah, because he based a certain ruling upon this fact. B.K. 56b. ');">⁹</span> But the other maintained: Even if the finder may not benefit from the loser's property, he may return it, and as for R. Joseph's <i>perutah</i>, this is rare.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' One rarely avails himself of that privilege, hence the finder gains nothing. ');">¹⁰</span>