Commentary for Bava Metzia 223:15

לא צריכא דקא אגריה מיניה לבטושי בטשא ובטשא במעתא:

R. Shesheth was asked: Does the injunction. '<i>The wages of him that is hired shall not abide all night</i>' hold good in respect of a contract or not?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., if the employee was not engaged by the day, but contracted to do a piece of work. ');">¹⁴</span> Does the artisan obtain a title in return for the improvement [he effected] in the article, so that it [his wages] rank as a loan, or does he not, and hence it is considered wages?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This question is discussed in B.K. 98b, et seq. One view is that when, e.g., wood is given to an artisan and he makes a box, it becomes legally his, on account of his improvements; and when he returns it to his employer it is in the nature of a sale. Hence, with respect to our subject, if the employer does not pay him, he owes him an ordinary debt, as a loan, and so the injunction is inapplicable. If, however, this view be rejected, it remains subject to the law of wages, and the prohibition holds good. ');">¹⁵</span> — R. Shesheth replied: One does transgress [the law]. But has it not been taught: There is no transgression [in this case]? — There it means that he gave him an order to a shopkeeper or a money-changer. Shall we say that the following supports him: If one gave his garment to an artisan [i.e., cloth, to make a garment, which he completed and then informed him [that it was ready], even after ten days he does not transgress [the law], 'Thou shalt not keep all night'. But if he delivered it to him [even] at midday, as soon as the sun sets upon it he is guilty of the transgression. Now, should you say that the artisan obtains a title in return for the improvement [he effects upon] the article, why is he guilty [of that transgression]? — R. Mari son of R. Kahana said: This refers to the removal of the woolly surface of a thick coat.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which is not considered an improvement. ');">¹⁶</span> But why did he give it to him [to do this]? [Surely] to soften it! Then that is its improvement?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And so the difficulty remains. ');">¹⁷</span> — But this holds good only if he engaged him for stamping,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A process of flattening cloth. ');">¹⁸</span> every stamping manipulation for a <i>ma'ah</i>.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., he did not contract for the whole piece of work at all, but was paid according to the amount done. ');">¹⁹</span>

Explore commentary for Bava Metzia 223:15. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.