ONE WHO PARDONED PRECEDENCE TO COLLECT (Yerushalmi Perek 10 Halachah 6 Daf 60b)
מתני' מי שהיה נשוי שתי נשים ומכר את שדהו וכתבה הראשונה ללוקח דין ודברים אין לי עמך השנייה מוציאה מיד הלוקח והראשונה מן השנייה והלוקח מיד הראשונה וחוזרות חלילה עד שיעשו פשרה ביניהן
(Mishnah #1): A man was married to two women and sold his field. His first wife wrote to the buyer 'I have no claim against you.' The second wife may collect the field from the buyer, the first wife collects from the second, and the buyer from the first wife. This cycle continues ad infinitum, until they reach a compromise;
וכן בעל חוב וכן אשה בעלת חוב:
The same applies to a [borrower or husband who sold two lands that together suffice to pay his debt or the Kesuvah, and the] creditor [waived his rights to collect from the second buyer], and similarly a woman who is a creditor (she is owed her Kesuvah, and she waived her rights to collect from the second buyer).
גמ' אמר רבי יוסי הדא אמרה ההן דיזיף מן תרין בני נש אתא תניינא אמר ליה קומי פושרין אמר ליה ולית סופיה דקדמייא משמע ומיתי מיטרוף יכיל מימר ליה פושרין ואין טרף טרף
(Gemara - R. Yosi) Inference: If one borrowed from two people [and does not have enough to pay both], and the second creditor said 'come compromise with me', and he answers 'in the end, the first [creditor] will hear and take [what I give to you]!', he [can say back] 'compromise with me - if he takes, he takes!' (PNEI MOSHE)
פישר מן השני חזקה שהראשון בא וטורף פישר מן הראשון
Question: If he compromised with the second, surely the first can come and take. If he compromised with the first [what is the law? Is it as if he bought property from the first, and the latter cannot collect from it?]
א"ר פינחס אתא עובדא קומי רבי ירמיה אמר פישר פישר
Answer (R. Pinchas): A case came in front of R. Yirmeyah. He said, if he compromised, he compromised (the latter cannot collect from it).
אמר רבי יוסי ולא כתב דאיקני
Objection (R. Yosi): Did [the borrower] not write [that he give a lien on] d'Ikni (property that I will acquire from now and onwards? This is normally written!)
לא אתייא אלא ביורש
Answer #1: [R. Yirmeyah's ruling] applies only to an heir. (He pays debts only from what he inherited, but not from new property that he acquires.)
אמר רבי חנינה אפילו בבעל חוב אתייא היא בההיא דלא כתיב כל דאיקני או שאמר לו אל יהא לך פירעון אלא מזה
Answer #2 (R. Chaninah): It applies even to a creditor, when he did not write [to the second lender] Kol d'Ikni, or he told him 'you will be paid only from this [property].'
אמר רבי מתנייה אתייא כמאן דמר לכתובה אבל לא לתניין [דף סא עמוד א] ברם כמאן דמר בין לכתובתה בין לתניין הא חזירה:
(R. Masniyah): This is like the opinion [that one who remarries his ex-wife does so on condition that she will receive only her original Kesuvah, i.e. [Ikar] Kesuvah, but not for stipulations. However, the one who says that it is both for Kesuvah and stipulations, she returned [totally like initially. Likewise, if the first creditor compromised and returned property, it returns like initially, before it was taken, and the second may collect from it - NO'AM YERUSHALMI, RIDVAZ.]