Bava Batra 183

מתני׳ <big><strong>המוכר</strong></big> פירות לחברו וזרען ולא צמחו ואפילו זרע פשתן אינו חייב באחריותן ר"ש בן גמליאל אומר זרעוני גינה שאינן נאכלין חייב באחריותן:

<b><i>MISHNAH</i></b>. [IF] ANYONE HAS SOLD FRUIT TO ANOTHER [NOT SPECIFYING WHETHER AS FOOD OR SEED], AND [THE BUYER] SOWED THEM AND THEY DID NOT GROW, EVEN [IF THEY WERE] LINSEED,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which are usually sold as seed. ');">¹</span> HE IS NOT RESPONSIBLE.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The seller may claim to have sold them as food, not as seed. ');">²</span>

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> איתמר המוכר שור לחבירו ונמצא נגחן רב אמר הרי זה מקח טעות ושמואל אמר יכול לומר לו לשחיטה מכרתיו לך

R. SIMEON B. GAMALIEL SAID: FOR GARDEN SEEDS WHICH ARE NOT EATEN, HE<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The seller. ');">³</span> IS RESPONSIBLE.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The entire transaction is invalid, since the purchase had been for seed, and it has proved to be useless for that purpose. ');">⁴</span>

וליחזי אי גברא דזבין לנכסתא לנכסתא אי לרדיא לרדיא בגברא דזבין להכי ולהכי

<b><i>GEMARA</i></b>. It has been stated:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' B.K. 46a. ');">⁵</span> [If] one has sold an ox to another, and it was found to have been wont to gore.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Before the sale took place. ');">⁶</span>

וליחזי דמי היכי נינהו

Rab said, the [sale] is under false pretences.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'mistaken deal', 'a purchase based on error'. An ox is usually purchased to plough or to perform similar service. The sale, therefore, took place under false pretences, and is consequently invalid, and the seller must return the purchase money. ');">⁷</span> But Samuel said: [The seller] can say to him, 'I have sold it to you for [the purpose of] slaughtering'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Samuel is of the opinion that, in money matters, general practice is no determining factor in the validity of the sale. The seller, therefore, can claim that, despite the general practice, he has sold him the ox, not for ploughing, but for slaughter. ');">⁸</span>

לא צריכא דאייקר בישרא וקם בדמי רדיא אי הכי למאי נפקא מינה נפקא מינה לטרחא

But [cannot the object of the sale] be seen [from the following]? If [he is] a man that buys for slaughtering [then this sale also must have been] for [the purpose of] slaughtering; [and] if for ploughing, [it must have been] for [the purpose of] ploughing. [why then, should there be a dispute between Rab and Samuel]? — [This dispute relates to the case] of a man who buys for both.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'for this and for that'; for ploughing or for slaughtering. ');">⁹</span> But why not see what price<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The cost of an animal for work is much higher than one for food only. ');">¹⁰</span>

היכי דמי

was paid?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'how the monies are. ');">¹¹</span> — The dispute is applicable [to the case] when the price of meat has risen and stands at [the same level as] the price of [an animal for] ploughing. If so, what difference is there [whether the animal was bought for ploughing or slaughtering]?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In either case the animal is worth the price paid for it; why, then, should Rab differ from Samuel by declaring such a deal to be invalid? ');">¹²</span> — [There is] a difference [in respect] of the trouble.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of killing the animal and selling it. For this reason, Rab declares the sale invalid and requires the seller to return the purchase price. ');">¹³</span> How is this<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That the seller is required to return the money he received. ');">¹⁴</span> to be understood?