Bava Metzia 115 - Shabbat June 22, 16 Sivan

In the event of the borrower's death, if one had taken a collateral, the creditor can keep it as payment for the loan. The lender would lose their money if there was no collateral and no land to collect from. Does the collateral need to be in the hands of the creditor at the time of death or is it enough that it was originally taken as collateral, but could have been temporarily returned at the time of death? Can we expound the reason for mitzvot in the Torah or not? There is an argument between Rabbi Shimon and Rabbi Yehuda about this regarding not taking collateral from a widow. Is it only a poor widow (so that when the creditor returns it every day, people won't speak negatively about the widow that a man is visiting her house or it is relevant for even a wealthy widow?  The Gemara questions this as the opinions seem switched in a different area (a king not being allowed many wives). The issue is resolved. It is forbidden to take the millstone as collateral and the verse adds "because he is taking his soul (livelihood)."  Is that adding on an extra negative commandment or is it coming to include other items that are essential to the borrower's existence? There is an argument about this and the Gemara tries to see whether this argument matches the argument between Rava and Abaye regarding not eating the Pesach sacrifice raw or uncooked as the verse also adds "because it needs to be roasted" - if one eats it raw, is one transgressing two commandments or one. The comparison is rejected.