Study Pesachim folio 31B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Rather, with what are we dealing here? With a situation where he, the non-Jew debtor, deposited the leavened bread that was serving as collateral with him, the Jewish creditor, and they disagree with regard to the statement of R' Yitzḥak. As R' Yitzḥak said: From where is it derived that a credit
The Talmud applies this principle to the explanation of the baraita: The first tanna holds that this applies only when a Jew takes collateral from a fellow Jew, such that I would read and apply the verse “It shall be righteousness for you” and establish that the collateral becomes the property of th
However, R' Meir holds that one can derive an a fortiori inference: If a Jew acquires collateral from another Jew, all the more so is it not clear that he will he acquire collateral from a non-Jew? However, with regard to a non-Jew who lends money to a Jew with leavened bread as collateral, everyo
We learned in the Mishnah: If a non-Jew lent money to a Jew, and the Jew gave him leavened bread as collateral until after Passover, and after Passover he retains this leavened bread in lieu of payment, then one is permitted to derive benefit from this leavened bread. Even granted that this is refe
From where do you say that he distinguishes between a case where he said that the collateral would be acquired from now and a case where he did not say that it would be acquired from now? As it was taught in a baraita: If a non-Jew deposited with a Jew bread baked in an oven [purni] as collateral fo