Bava Metzia 97

Chapter 97

א אלא משכון דנקיט למה ליה אלא לאו שמע מיניה מאי אינו משמט דקאמר רבן שמעון בן גמליאל אינו משמט בכולו ומאי משמט דקאמר רבי יהודה הנשיא להך פלגא דלא נקיט עליה משכון

1 For what purpose then does he hold the pledge? Surely then this proves that by 'it does not cancel it' R. Simeon b. Gamaliel means that it does not cancel it at all, whilst by 'It does cancel it' R. Judah refers to the half against which he holds no pledge. and they differ in this: R. Simeon b. Gamaliel holds that it [the pledge] effects a title to the whole [of the loan].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., when the creditor receives a pledge for a portion of the loan, it is as though he were already actually in possession of goods to the value of the whole loan. Therefore it is unaffected by the law of release. ');">1 whilst R. Judah ha-Nasi holds that it effects a title only to the value thereof!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And in the same way, when a deposit is given on goods in a sale, it effects possession of the whole or of its own value, according to these two Tannaim respectively. ');">2

ב ובהא קמיפלגי דרבן שמעון בן גמליאל סבר כנגד כולו הוא קונה ורבי יהודה הנשיא סבר כנגדו הוא קונה

2 — No. By 'It does not cancel [the loan]' R. Simeon b. Gamaliel means that half against which he holds a pledge. Then it follows that in R. Judah's opinion even the half against which he holds a pledge is also cancelled! But [if so,] what is the purpose of the pledge? — As a mere record of fact.3 R. Kahana was given money [in advance payment] for flax. subsequently flax appreciated, so he came before Rab. 'Deliver [the goods] to the value of the money you received,' said he to him; 'but as for the rest, it is a mere verbal transaction, and a verbal transaction does not involve a breach of faith.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Though the Mishnah states that he who does not stand by his word will be punished, that is only when his word is substantiated by the payment of money, which, though not legally, is morally binding. But where no money has been paid, a transaction can be cancelled without any scruples. ');">4

ג לא מאי אינו משמט דקאמר רבן שמעון בן גמליאל להך פלגא דנקיט עליה משכון מכלל דרבי יהודה הנשיא סבר להך פלגא דנקיט עליה משכון נמי משמט אלא משכון דנקיט למה ליה לזכרון דברים בעלמא

3 For it has been stated: A verbal transaction: Rab said: It involves no breach of faith; R. Johanan ruled: It does involve a breach of faith. An objection is raised: R. Jose son of R. Judah said: What is taught by the verse, A just hin [shall ye have]:5

ד רב כהנא יהבו ליה זוזי אכיתנא לסוף אייקר כיתנא אתא לקמיה דרב אמר ליה במאי דנקיטת זוזי הב להו ואידך דברים נינהו ודברים אין בהן משום מחוסרי אמנה

4 surely 'hin' is included in 'ephah'?6 But it is to teach you that your 'yes' [hen] should be just and your 'no' should be just!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is a play on words, 'hin', a measure being connected with hen, Aramaic for 'yes'. This shews that even a mere verbal transaction must not be violated, and so contradicts Rab. ');">7

ה דאיתמר דברים רב אמר אין בהן משום מחוסרי אמנה ורבי יוחנן אמר יש בהם משום מחוסרי אמנה

5 — Abaye said: That means that one must not speak one thing with the mouth and another with the heart.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., it is a general exhortation against deceitful speech, but does not refer to an actual transaction. Rashi: Whilst arranging a transaction, one must not there and then have the intention of withdrawing. But if a verbal bargain is made in good faith, there is nothing wrong in withdrawing from it subsequently if the market price changes. ');">8 An objection is raised: R. Simeon said: Though they [sc. the Sages] ruled: [The delivery of] a garment acquires the gold denar, but not vice versa: that, however is only the halachah, but they [also] said: He who punished the generations of the Flood and of Dispersion, the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah,and the Egyptians at the [Red] Sea, He will exact vengeance of him who does not stand by his word; [and he who makes a verbal transaction effects no title, yet he who retracts therefrom, the spirit of the Sages is displeased with him]!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The refutation is contained in the bracketed passage, though it is not cited in the text. Thus we see that the breaking even of a mere verbal transaction is reprehensible. ');">9

ו מיתיבי רבי יוסי ברבי יהודה אומר מה תלמוד לומר (ויקרא יט, לו) הין צדק והלא הין בכלל איפה היה אלא לומר לך שיהא הן שלך צדק ולאו שלך צדק אמר אביי ההוא שלא ידבר אחד בפה ואחד בלב

6 — It is a dispute of the Tannaim, for we learnt: It once happened that R. Johanan b. Mathia said to his son, 'Go out and engage labourers.' He went, and agreed to supply them with food. But on his returning to his father, the latter said, 'My son, should you even prepare for them a banquet like Solomon's when in his glory. you cannot fulfil your Undertaking, for they are children of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. But, before they commence work, go out and tell them, "[I engage you] on condition that you have no claim upon me other than bread and beans."'10 Now, if you should think that words involve a breach of faith, how could he say to him, 'Go and withdraw'? — There it is different, for the labourers themselves did not rely [upon him]. Why? Because they knew full well that he himself was dependent upon his father.11

ז מיתיבי ר' שמעון אומר אף על פי שאמרו טלית קונה דינר זהב ואין דינר זהב קונה טלית מכל מקום כך הלכה אבל אמרו מי שפרע מאנשי דור המבול ומאנשי דור הפלגה הוא עתיד ליפרע ממי שאינו עומד בדיבורו

7 If so, even if they had [already] commenced work, it is also thus!12 — Once they have commenced work, they certainly rely [upon him], for they reason: He must have reported to his father, who agreed thereto.

ח תנאי היא דתנן מעשה ברבי יוחנן בן מתיא שאמר לבנו צא ושכור לנו פועלים הלך ופסק להם מזונות וכשבא אצל אביו אמר לו בני אפילו אתה עושה להם כסעודת שלמה בשעתו לא יצאת ידי חובתך עמהם שהן בני אברהם יצחק ויעקב אלא עד שלא יתחילו במלאכה צא ואמור להם על מנת שאין לכם עלי אלא פת וקטנית בלבד

8 Now, did R. Johanan say thus?13 But Rabbah b. Bar Hanah said in R. Johanan's name: If one says to his neighbour. 'I will make you a gift'. he can retract therefrom. 'He can [retract]' — but that is obvious!14

ט ואי ס"ד דברים יש בהן משום מחוסרי אמנה היכי אמר ליה זיל הדר בך שאני התם דפועלים גופייהו לא סמכא דעתייהו מאי טעמא מידע ידעי דעל אבוה סמך

9 Hence [he must have meant], He is permitted to withdraw!15 — R. Papa replied: R. Johanan admits16

י אי הכי אפילו התחילו במלאכה נמי התחילו במלאכה ודאי סמכי דעתייהו אמרו מימר אמר קמיה דאבוה וניחא ליה

10 in the case of a small gift,17 because he [the recipient] relies thereon.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That he will certainly fulfil his promise; hence he cannot retract without a breach of faith. But if one promises a large gift, the beneficiary himself does not have full confidence in the promise, and therefore withdrawal is permitted. In the case of a business transaction, each party naturally looks to the other to fulfil his undertaking, and therefore a breach of faith is involved (R. Han.). ');">18

יא ומי אמר רבי יוחנן הכי והאמר רבה בר בר חנה אמר רבי יוחנן האומר לחבירו מתנה אני נותן לך יכול לחזור בו יכול פשיטא אלא מותר לחזור בו אמר רב פפא ומודה רבי יוחנן במתנה מועטת דסמכא דעתייהו

11 That is logical too. For R. Abbahu said in R. Johanan's name: If an Israelite says to a Levite, 'You have a kor of tithe in my Possession',19 he [the Levite] may declare20

יב הכי נמי מסתברא דאמר רבי אבהו אמר רבי יוחנן ישראל שאמר לבן לוי כור מעשר יש לך בידי בן לוי רשאי לעשותו תרומת מעשר על מקום אחר אי אמרת בשלמא לא מצי למיהדר ביה משום הכי רשאי אלא אי אמרת מצי למיהדר ביה אמאי רשאי אישתכח דקא אכיל טבלים

12 it the terumah of the tithe for other produce.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'for another place'. The Levite himself had to give a tithe of the tithe he received to the priests; this was known as the terumah (separation) of the tithe [H]. Now, R. Johanan states that when an Israelite promises a kor of tithe to a Levite, who himself possesses tithes for which he is bound to separate terumah, he may declare this kor to be the terumah thereof, even before it reaches his hand. ');">21 Now, if you agree that he [the Israelite] cannot [morally] withdraw, it is well: therefore he [the Levite] is permitted [to declare this as the terumah of the tithe]. But if you say that he [the Israelite] can retract, why is he [the Levite] permitted [to declare etc.], seeing that it may thereby transpire that he eats tebel?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Untithed produce. v. Glos. Immediately the Levite makes his declaration, he proceeds to eat of the tithes he possesses; but should the Israelite withdraw, the Levite's declaration is retrospectively invalid, and thus he has eaten tebel. This proves that the Israelite cannot retract without breach of faith, and therefore the Levite may make his declaration on the assumption that he will certainly not do so. — Though a kor is a large quantity, it is considered a small gift from the point of view of the Israelite, who must give it away in any case (Rashi). ');">22

יג הכא במאי עסקינן כגון שנטלו ממנו וחזר והפקידו אצלו

13 — The reference here is to a case where, e.g., he [the Levite] had already received it and then re-entrusted it to him [the Israelite] — 23 If so, consider the second clause: If he gave it to another Levite, he [the Levite] has nothing but resentment against him.24 But if you should think that it means, e.g., that he took it from him and then re-entrusted it to him: why has he nothing but resentment against him? Since he took possession thereof, he has a monetary claim upon him! Hence it must certainly mean that he did not [first] take it from him. Which proves it.25

יד אי הכי אימא סיפא נתנו לבן לוי אחר אין לו עליו אלא תרעומת ואי סלקא דעתך כגון שנטלו ממנו וחזר והפקידו אצלו אמאי אין לו עליו אלא תרעומת כיון דמשכיה ממונא אית ליה גביה אלא לאו שמע מינה בדלא נטלו שמע מינה

14 A certain man gave money for poppy seed. Subsequently poppy seed advanced in price, so he [the vendor] retracted and said, 'I have no poppy seed: take back your money.' But he would not take his money, and it was stolen. When they came before Raba, he said he him: Since he said to you, 'Take back your money,' and you would not, not only is he not accounted a paid bailee.26 but he is not even a gratuitous bailee. Thereupon the Rabbis protested before Raba: But he [the vendor] would have had to submit to [the curse] 'He who punished'!27

טו ההוא גברא דיהיב זוזי אשומשמי לסוף אייקר שומשמי הדרו בהו ואמרו ליה לית לן שומשמי שקול זוזך לא שקיל זוזיה איגנוב אתו לקמיה דרבא אמר ליה כיון דאמרי לך שקול זוזך ולא שקלית לא מבעיא שומר שכר דלא הוי אלא אפילו שומר חנם נמי לא הוי אמרו ליה רבנן לרבא והא בעי לקבולי עליה מי שפרע אמר להו הכי נמי

15 — He replied: That is even so.28 R. Papi said: Rabina told me, 'One of the Rabbis, named R. Tabuth — others state, R. Samuel b. Zutra — who, if he were given all the underground treasures of the world29

טז אמר רב פפי אמר לי רבינא לדידי אמר לי ההוא מרבנן ורב טבות שמיה ואמרי לה רב שמואל בר זוטרא שמיה דאי הוו יהבי ליה כל חללא דעלמא לא הוי קא משני בדבוריה בדידי הוה עובדא ההוא יומא אפניא דמעלי שבתא הוה והוה יתיבנא ואתא ההוא גברא וקאי אבבא אמר לי אית לך שומשמי לזבוני

16 would not break his word, told me: That incident happened with me.30 That day was Sabbath eve, and I was sitting when a certain man came, stood at the threshold, and asked me, "Have you poppy seed for sale?"

Previous Chapter Next Chapter