Answer #2: Bnei Noach were not commanded about Ribis;

Implied question: [The one who lent to Nochrim with Ribis,] why wasn't he revived in the valley of Dura?

Answer: This was not a punishment, for this was not the time for revival of all the dead. He was not punished more than other Mesim who were not revived at that time;

Rather, his colleagues merited because they were careful about Ribis, even though they were not commanded, just like our Avos kept the Torah even though it was not given to them.

Explanation: Teshuvos ha'Ge'onim writes in the name of Rav Tzadok Gaon that "Yored Imo l'Chayav" means that he may burn a third of his grain.

Question: This is utterly astounding. What is his source?!

Question: Perhaps it is due to other Aveiros in that verse - "v'Shochad Al Naki Lo Lakach"!

Answer #1: He asks that we see also total Tzadikim who falter.

Answer #2: We challenge R. Akiva, who expounds at the end of Makos (24a) "Oseh Eleh" - one who does one of all of these will not falter.

Question: After "Eker", why does it write "Mishpachas Ger", i.e. a Nochri? Since he was sold to idolatry, if so he was sold to a Nochri!

Answer #1: One might have thought that he was sold to idolatry of a Yisrael, i.e. Pesel Michah.

Answer #2: Had the Torah not written Mishpachas Ger, one might have thought that Eker is a Nochri.

Suggested Answer #3: We need [Mishpachas Ger] to teach that there is a Mitzvah for relatives to redeem [one who was sold to a Nochri].

Rejection: We learn from [the Mitzvah to redeem one who was sold to] a Ger Toshav, and all the more so [one who was sold to] a Nochri!

Observation: It taught "daughter" along with "son". [This is no Chidush,] for even one who was sold to a Yisrael does not serve the daughter [of the master, after he dies].

Explanation: This is merely due to scandalous talk, because [a dog] will always follow her around;

Yisrael are not suspected about homosexual relations or bestiality, and there is no Isur to be secluded [with an animal, or two men together].

Question #1: Why must he say "I will give to you"? Even if he says "I will give to the Nochri", it is forbidden! We permit only when he put [the money] by the Nochri [and the Nochri lends it to the Yisrael];

[When he says "I will give to you",] since he lends his coins to his friend so that his friend will pay the Nochri Ribis for him, obviously this is Ribis!

Even if the lender did not owe Ribis to the Nochri, since [the second Yisrael] gives Ribis to the Nochri due to the loan, based on the directive of the lender (the first Yisrael), this is like giving to the lender himself, through the law of Arev (guarantor. When the lender gives to the borrower based on the directive of the Arev, the Arev is obligated as if he received the money);

This is like "[a woman who said] give 100 Zuz to Ploni, and I will be Mekudeshes to you." She is Mekudeshes based on the law of an Arev (Kidushin 7a).

Question #2: Similarly, the Seifa is difficult! (When the Nochri wanted to return his loan to a Yisrael, and another Yisrael asked to take the money, why does it say "I will give to you [like you needed to pay to the Yisrael]"? Even if he says "I will give to the Yisrael, it is permitted!)

Answer (to both questions): It says "to you" due to when he put [the money by the lender]. The Reisha teaches that even when the Yisrael (the first borrower) receives the Ribis, it is permitted, since he receives it for the Nochri;

Similarly in the Seifa, when he put [the money] by the Yisrael it is forbidden even if the Nochri receives the Ribis (since he receives it for the Yisrael).

Question: Why isn't this absolute Ribis when he put [the money] by the Yisrael, even if the Nochri receives the Ribis? The second Yisrael becomes the Shali'ach of the first to receive [the first Yisrael's] debt from the Nochri's hand!

Answer: Even if one can be Zocheh (acquire) a Metziah for his friend, here [the second Yisrael's] taking from the Nochri does not acquire for his Yisrael friend (the lender);

Granted, if the Nochri would make the coins Hefker, [the second Yisrael] could acquire them. However, now the Nochri does not make them Hefker;

Rather, he comes to acquire his coins to the lender through this borrower. He cannot be Zocheh!

If he could, the Yisrael who receives would be the Nochri's Shali'ach to acquire the Yisrael's coins, and a Nochri cannot have Shelichus.

It should have been permitted even if he put [the money] by the Yisrael, if not that to be stringent, we say that Shelichus applies to a Nochri.

Distinction: However, in the Reisha, why is it permitted when he puts by the Nochri? Since Shelichus does not apply to a Nochri, it turns out the second Yisrael did not acquire for the Nochri through his acceptance, and he does not owe anything to the Nochri. He owes only the Yisrael;

When he gives Ribis to the Nochri, he gives for the Yisrael lender and exempts him with respect to the Nochri. It is as if he gives to the Yisrael himself.

Explanation: The Gemara answers that he said "leave [the coins] on the ground and be exempt", and the borrower will take them from the ground through the Nochri's command, to be obligated to him principal and Ribis;

Even if the Yisrael did not make the coins Hefker when he put them on the ground, and they are still his when the second Yisrael takes them, in any case when he pays Ribis to the Nochri, it is not for the first Yisrael, for the Nochri already exempted him.

Distinction: However, if he did not put them on the ground, rather, he said "give to Ploni the Yisrael and be exempt, and I will stipulate with him that he give to me principal and Ribis", it is forbidden.

Implied question: Also now, he does not pay Ribis [to the Nochri] to exempt the first [Yisrael], for the Nochri already exempted him! (Why is it forbidden?)

Answer: In any case, since he received the coins from the first Yisrael, that until now the coins were in his Achrayus, it looks like he gives to him Ribis, even though he does not stipulate with him, rather, with the Nochri.

Explanation #1 (R. Tam): Now, we no longer say that the Seifa is a stringency, like we said initially. Rather, the case is, he took and gave with his hand. The Yisrael received the coins from the Nochri and gave them to his friend.

The Chidush is that we do not say that he resolved to be Makneh with intent for the Nochri.

Support: We find "Bishlama" like this in Yevamos (34a) that does not last (we retract from it), regarding "Bishlama, we find [that when brothers were Mekadesh sisters, the Isurim of Eshes Ish, Eshes Ach and Achos Ishto come simultaneously] when they made a Shali'ach (the brothers made one Shali'ach to be Mekadesh, and the sisters made one Shali'ach to receive Kidushin, and the Kidushin moneys were given together)."

Explanation #2: Rashi and R. Chananel connote that really, the Seifa is a stringency.

Citation (Yerushalmi): If a Yisrael appointed a Nochri to be an overseer [on his house] or Santar (overseer on all his property), one may borrow from him with Ribis. If a Nochri appointed a Yisrael to be an overseer or Santar, one may not borrow from him with Ribis;

Citation (cont.): If a Nochri's coins were deposited with a Yisrael, one may not borrow from him with Ribis. If a Yisrael's coins were deposited with a Nochri, one may borrow from him with Ribis.

Citation (cont.): The general rule is - if the Yisrael has Achrayus, it is forbidden. If the Nochri has Achrayus, it is permitted.

Pesak: In a Teshuvah, R. Tam wrote that it is totally permitted in such a case, that the Yisrael borrower sends his securities with a Nochri or the Yisrael's slave;

The lender takes the securities from the Nochri and gives the coins to the Nochri, or even to the Yisrael, but the lender says "I lend to you for the sake of the Nochri";

The lender does not rely at all on the borrower, rather, on the securities, and the borrower is removed from the security, for if it is lost, he has no claim against the lender, for [the lender] received it from the Nochri.

Pesak: A Yisrael may be an Arev for a Nochri, for a Yisrael lender does not pursue the Arev [for payment], rather, he pursues the borrower;

If the Nochri does not pay, the Arev pays the principal and Ribis. Now, [the Arev] lends to the Nochri.