Bava Metzia

MISHNAH. ONE MAY NOT ACCEPT FROM AN ISRAELITE AN 'IRON FLOCK' [INVESTMENT WITH COMPLETE IMMUNITY FOR THE INVESTOR], BECAUSE THAT IS USURY. BUT SUCH MAY BE ACCEPTED FROM HEATHENS.  AND ONE MAY BORROW FROM AND LEND TO THEM ON INTEREST. THE SAME APPLIES TO A RESIDENT ALIEN.  AN ISRAELITE MAY LEND A GENTILES MONEY [ON INTEREST] WITH THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE GENTILE, BUT NOT OF THE ISRAELITE. GEMARA. Shall we say that it stands under the ownership of the contractor?  But the following is opposed thereto: If one undertakes [to breed sheep] on 'iron flock' terms for a heathen,  the young are exempt from [the law of] firstlings!  — Abaye answered: There is no difficulty; in the one case, he [the owner] accepted [the risk of] unpreventable accident and depreciation; in the other, he did not.  Said Raba to him: If the owner accepts the risk of depreciation and [unpreventable] accidents, do you designate it 'iron flock'? Moreover, instead of the second clause teaching, BUT SUCH MAY BE ACCEPTED FROM GENTILES, let a distinction be drawn and taught in that [sc. the first clause] itself, [thus:] When does this hold good [that 'iron flock' may not be accepted from a Jew], only if he [the investor] does not bear the risk of unpreventable accidents or depreciation; but if the investor accepts these risks, it is permissible? — But, said Raba, in both cases [viz., as taught in our Mishnah and with reference to firstlings] he [the investor] does not accept the risk of accidental damage or depreciation; but with respect to the firstlings, this is the reason that the young are exempt thereof: since if he [the breeder] did not render the money,  the heathen would come and seize the cow [entrusted to the breeder in the first place], and should he not find the cow, seize the young, it is a case of 'the hand of a heathen coming in the middle',  and wherever that is so, there is exemption from the law of firstlings: He that by usury and unjust gain increaseth his substance, he shall gather it for him that pitieth the poor.  Who is meant by, for him that pitieth the poor? — Rab said: e.g., King Shapur.  R. Nahman observed: Huna told me that [this verse] is needed to show that usury [taken] even from a heathen [leads to loss of one's wealth]. Raba objected to R. Nahman: Unto a stranger tashshik:  now, what is meant by 'tashshik': surely that 'thou mayest receive usury'? — No: 'thou mayest give usury.'  [What!] Cannot one do without?  — It is to exclude 'thy brother,' [to whom thou mayest] not [give usury].  As for thy brother, is it not explicitly stated, but unto thy brother thou shalt not give usury?  — [To intimate] that both a positive and negative injunction are violated.  He [further] raised an objection: ONE MAY BORROW FROM AND LEND MONEY TO THEM ON INTEREST, AND THE SAME APPLIES TO A RESIDENT ALIEN!  — R. Hiyya, the son of R. Huna, said: This [permission] is granted only [up to]