Study Ketubot folio 108A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
the other may contribute his shekel for him, i.e., it is permitted for the second individual to donate the half-shekel from his own money to the Temple on behalf of the first one, who is prohibited by the vow from deriving benefit; and he may repay his debt for him, i.e., if the one prohibited by t
The Talmud discusses this Mishnah: Granted, he may contribute his shekel for him, as he thereby performs a mitzva. The one prohibited by the vow from deriving benefit does not derive any direct benefit from this action, as even if he did not pay the half-shekel, all Jews have a share in the commun
And concerning the halakha that he may return to him his lost object, he also performs a mitzva by means of this action. However, with regard to the statement that he may repay his debt for him, this is problematic because it provides a gain for the one prohibited by the vow from deriving benefit; i
Rav Oshaya said: In accordance with whose opinion is this Mishnah? It is in accordance with the opinion of Ḥanan, who said in the Mishnah: He has lost his money. In other words, this is referring to a case in which he repays a debt that the other does not really have to repay at all, and therefore
And Rava said: You can even say that this is in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis, and here we are dealing with a situation where the borrower borrowed money on the condition that he need not pay it back until he chooses to do so. In that case, if the one from whom this borrower may not deri