Our Gemara on Amud Aleph references how the sages were careful to enact ordinances that protected purchasers from unknown liens and repossessions. However, they balanced this with a need for reasonable mechanisms for creditors to collect debt so as not to discourage people from lending. Additionally, there is a mitzvah incumbent upon the heirs to pay debts from the estate of the deceased, as discussed on 174a.

The Pele Yoetz ("Loveh") employs both the principle of the mitzvah to pay debts and the socio-economic need to encourage the ability to lend money without fear in a novel manner, as I shall explain in the analysis below.

The Pele Yoetz opens with a surprising idea: “It is good for a person to borrow from his friend from time to time in order to fulfill the mitzvah of paying a debt owed to him. Likewise, in some of the commandments, a man that fears the Lord, delights in His commandments, seeks to bring himself into obligation and fulfill them, and is found to be zealous and will reap the reward for such behavior.”

It seems odd that the Pele Yoetz advises a person to manufacture an excuse to borrow in order to fulfill the mitzvah of loan repayment. One might think that it is unnecessary to create a fictional obligation, especially when it also involves another person’s efforts. After all, you might not need the money, but the person lending it might be stretching their budget. If so, your righteousness is hurting someone else. And, even if possible through intuition to avoid overburdening someone else, why is this so important to chase after?

There is a similar motivation discussed in Gemara Nedarim (10b):

Rabbi Yehuda says: The Chasidim Harishonim (early generations of pious men) would desire to bring a sin-offering but did not have the opportunity to do so because the Holy One, Blessed be He, does not bring about a stumbling block through them, and they would not sin even unwittingly. What would they do? They would rise and volunteer naziriteship to the Omnipresent in order to be liable to bring a sin-offering of a nazirite to the Omnipresent.

It’s difficult to understand this form of piety. If they actually did not sin, they did not need to bring a sin offering, so why desire such a sacrifice?

The Shita Mekubetzes explains that the Chasidim Harishonim never sinned in a major way that required a chattas (sin-offering) sacrifice, but they still wanted to benefit from the atonement that the chattas confers. The Shita Mekubetzes appears to hold that the chattas offering can achieve forgiveness for minor sins too. Therefore, the Chasidim Harishonim wanted to use this chattas as an umbrella protection plan for minor sins. On the other hand, the Rosh (ibid) gives a different rationale. He says they desired to have the experience of bringing a chattas so that they would not miss out on any opportunity to bring a sacrifice.

According to the Shita, we have no indication that the same logic should apply to the mitzvah of tzedakah. In Nedarim, the Chasidim Harishonim wanted to use the sacrifice to bring about forgiveness, albeit for no major sins, but sins nonetheless. However, the Rosh’s explanation for why the Chasidim Harishonim sought to bring a chattas could also explain the Pele Yoetz’s idea that one should arrange to borrow just to fulfill the mitzvah of paying up a debt. Apparently, to desire a new mitzvah experience even when not obligated is considered a commendable expression of love and regard for the mitzvos in general. We might compare this to a foodie who wants to try a new dish.

This seems to be the primary reason given by the Pele Yoetz, as he states, “A man that fears the Lord, delights in His commandments, seeks to bring himself into obligation and fulfill them.” However, in this same entry, the Pele Yoetz also speaks of the importance of ensuring that all debts are repaid, and that the authorities must assist in debt collection so as not to discourage lending, as we saw in our Gemara. He also mentions that each person should be scrupulous in repaying their debt for this same reason—to create an environment of trust where people are comfortable lending money.

There is a final reason that we can find in the Rambam, though he did not explicitly apply it to the Pele Yoetz’s case. In Avos (3:15), the Rambam values giving charity 1,000 times with a thousand separate coins and recipients far more than one single gift of 1,000 coins. He explains that repetition incorporates behavior into the person’s character. Therefore, the Rambam might encourage the practice of borrowing money, even if not needed, to ingrain the trait of repaying debt. Wew might even say this practice would even ingrain the trait of lending money as well, as positive experience of brotherhood, sharing, gratitude and trust promotes more such behavior. This ingraining of behavior can operate on both a micro and macro level. On the micro level, the traits of honesty, responsibility, and courtesy to the lender are developed with each act of repayment. On the macro level, society observes good behavior and healthy interdependence—a bedrock for a smoothly functioning society. This is known as Behavioral Momentum and is also a principle expressed in Avos (4:2): “One mitzvah leads to another.”