Bava Metzia 116

איפכא מסתברא אמר ליה איסמיה

The logic is the reverse.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sacrifices for which one bears responsibility are the property of their owner, whilst those for which no responsibility is borne are rather to be regarded as that of God (v. p. 335, n. 7). ');">¹</span>

אמר ליה לא הכי קאמר קדשים שחייב באחריותן חייב דאיתרבו מבה' וכחש ושאינו חייב באחריותן פטור דאמעיט מבעמיתו וכחש:

'Then shall I delete it?' he asked? 'No,' he replied, 'It means this: For sacrifices for which he [the owner] bears responsibility he [a bailee] is liable, for these are included in [If a soul sin&nbsp;…] against the Lord, and lie:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The real reason of liability is the fact that these are secular property. But to meet the objection that after all, having been sanctified, they are sacred property, the phrase 'against the Lord and lie' is adduced, to shew that even when there is an element of sacredness a guilt offering is still due. ');">²</span>

רבי יהודה אומר אף המוכר ספר תורה מרגלית ובהמה אין להם אונאה: תניא רבי יהודה אומר אף המוכר ספר תורה אין לה אונאה לפי שאין קץ לדמיה בהמה ומרגלית אין להם אונאה מפני שאדם רוצה לזווגן

but for those for which he [the owner] bears no responsibility he [a bailee] is not liable, because they are excluded by&nbsp;… against his neighbour and lie.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' But since the owner is not responsible for them, they are entirely God's, not 'his neighbour's.' ');">³</span>

אמרו לו והלא הכל אדם רוצה לזווגן ורבי יהודה הני חשיבי ליה והני לא חשיבי ליה ועד כמה אמר אמימר עד כדי דמיהם

R. JUDAH SAID: ALSO WHEN ONE SELLS A SCROLL OF THE TORAH, AN ANIMAL, OR A PEARL, THERE IS NO LAW OF OVERREACHING. It has been taught: R. Judah said, The sale of a scroll of the law too is not subject to overreaching, because its value is unassessable;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'unlimited.' ');">⁴</span>

תניא ר' יהודה בן בתירא אומר אף המוכר סוס וסייף וחטיטום במלחמה אין להם אונאה מפני שיש בהן חיי נפש:

an animal or a pearl is not subject to overreaching, because one desires to match them.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When a man possesses one ox, he may be very anxious to procure another of equal strength, because it is inconvenient to plough with two animals of dissimilar capacities. Therefore he may knowingly overpay, hence the law of overreaching does not apply. So with a pearl, if it exactly matches others in his possession. ');">⁵</span>

<big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> כשם שאונאה במקח וממכר כך אונאה בדברים לא יאמר לו בכמה חפץ זה והוא אינו רוצה ליקח אם היה בעל תשובה לא יאמר לו זכור מעשיך הראשונים אם הוא בן גרים לא יאמר לו זכור מעשה אבותיך שנאמר (שמות כב, כ) וגר לא תונה ולא תלחצנו:

Said they [the sages] to him, But one wishes to match up everything!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Whatever one buys may be needed to match something else, or is particularly suitable for the buyer's purpose, in which case the same argument holds good. ');">⁶</span>

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> ת"ר (ויקרא כה, יז) לא תונו איש את עמיתו באונאת דברים הכתוב מדבר אתה אומר באונאת דברים או אינו אלא באונאת ממון כשהוא אומר (ויקרא כה, יד) וכי תמכרו ממכר לעמיתך או קנה מיד עמיתך הרי אונאת ממון אמור הא מה אני מקיים (ויקרא כה, יז) לא תונו איש את עמיתו באונאת דברים

And R. Judah?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Why does he draw a distinction between these articles and others? ');">⁷</span>

הא כיצד אם היה בעל תשובה אל יאמר לו זכור מעשיך הראשונים אם היה בן גרים אל יאמר לו זכור מעשה אבותיך אם היה גר ובא ללמוד תורה אל יאמר לו פה שאכל נבילות וטריפות שקצים ורמשים בא ללמוד תורה שנאמרה מפי הגבורה

— These are particularly important to him [the purchaser]; others are not. And to what extent?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Can one overcharge without committing fraud? — it being assumed that R. Judah could not mean that there was no redress under any circumstances. ');">⁸</span>

אם היו יסורין באין עליו אם היו חלאים באין עליו או שהיה מקבר את בניו אל יאמר לו כדרך שאמרו לו חביריו לאיוב (איוב ד, ו) הלא יראתך כסלתך תקותך ותום דרכיך זכר נא מי הוא נקי אבד

— Said Amemar: Up to their value.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., if double is charged there is no redress; above that, however, involves overreaching. ');">⁹</span>

אם היו חמרים מבקשין תבואה ממנו לא יאמר להם לכו אצל פלוני שהוא מוכר תבואה ויודע בו שלא מכר מעולם ר"י אומר אף לא יתלה עיניו על המקח בשעה שאין לו דמים שהרי הדבר מסור ללב וכל דבר המסור ללב נאמר בו ויראת מאלהיך

It has been taught, R. Judah b. Bathyra said: The sale of a horse, sword, and buckler on [the field of] battle are not subject to overreaching, because one's very life is dependent upon them.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hence the soldier needing them will knowingly overpay. ');">¹⁰</span>

א"ר יוחנן משום ר"ש בן יוחאי גדול אונאת דברים מאונאת ממון שזה נאמר בו (ויקרא כה, יז) ויראת מאלהיך וזה לא נאמר בו ויראת מאלהיך ור' אלעזר אומר זה בגופו וזה בממונו רבי שמואל בר נחמני אמר זה ניתן להישבון וזה לא ניתן להישבון

<b><i>MISHNAH</i></b>. JUST AS THERE IS OVERREACHING IN BUYING AND SELLING, SO IS THERE WRONG DONE BY WORDS. [THUS:] ONE MUST NOT ASK ANOTHER, 'WHAT IS THE PRICE OF THIS ARTICLE?' IF HE HAS NO INTENTION OF BUYING. IF A MAN WAS A REPENTANT [SINNER], ONE MUST NOT SAY TO HIM, 'REMEMBER YOUR FORMER DEEDS.' IF HE WAS A SON OF PROSELYTES ONE MUST NOT TAUNT HIM, 'REMEMBER THE DEEDS OF YOUR ANCESTORS,' BECAUSE IT IS WRITTEN, THOU SHALT NEITHER WRONG A STRANGER, NOR OPPRESS HIM.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XXII, 20. ');">¹¹</span>

תני תנא קמיה דרב נחמן בר יצחק כל המלבין פני חבירו ברבים כאילו שופך דמים א"ל שפיר קא אמרת דחזינא ליה דאזיל סומקא ואתי חוורא אמר ליה אביי לרב דימי במערבא במאי זהירי א"ל באחוורי אפי דאמר רבי חנינא הכל יורדין לגיהנם חוץ משלשה

<b><i>GEMARA</i></b>. Our Rabbis taught: <i>Ye shall not therefore wrong one another</i>;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXV, 17. ');">¹²</span>

הכל ס"ד אלא אימא כל היורדין לגיהנם עולים חוץ משלשה שיורדין ואין עולין ואלו הן הבא על אשת איש והמלבין פני חבירו ברבים והמכנה שם רע לחבירו מכנה היינו מלבין אע"ג דדש ביה בשמיה

Scripture refers to verbal wrongs. You say, 'verbal wrongs'; but perhaps that is not so, monetary wrongs being meant? When it is said, <i>And if thou sell aught unto thy neighbour, or acquirest aught of thy neighbour [ye shall not wrong one another]</i>,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. 14. ');">¹³</span>

אמר רבה בר בר חנה אמר רבי יוחנן

monetary wrongs are already dealt with. Then to what can I refer, ye shall not therefore wrong each other? To verbal wrongs. E.g., If a man is a penitent, one must not say to him, 'Remember your former deeds.' If he is the son of proselytes he must not be taunted with, 'Remember the deeds of your ancestors. If he is a proselyte and comes to study the Torah, one must not say to him, 'Shall the mouth that ate unclean and forbidden food,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Heb. nebeloth, terefoth, q.v. Glos. ');">¹⁴</span> abominable and creeping things, come to study the Torah which was uttered by the mouth of Omnipotence!' If he is visited by suffering, afflicted with disease, or has buried his children, one must not speak to him as his companions spoke to Job, is not thy fear [of God] thy confidence, And thy hope the integrity of thy ways? Remember, I pray thee, who ever perished, being innocent?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Job IV, 6f. ');">¹⁵</span> If assdrivers sought grain from a person, he must not say to them, 'Go to so and so who sells grain,' whilst knowing that he has never sold any. R. Judah said: One may also not feign interest in<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'look up to. ');">¹⁶</span> a purchase when he has no money, since this is known to the heart only,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H] Lit., 'entrusted to the heart.' ');">¹⁷</span> and of everything known only to the heart it is written, and thou shalt fear thy God.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXV, 17. Man cannot know whether one's intentions are legitimate or not, since they are concealed, but God knows (Rashi). [This beautiful phrase [H] which, were certain critics of Pharisaism right, ought never to have been on Pharisaic lips (Abrahams, I. Studies on Pharisaism, Second Series, p. 116), may also denote matters left to ethical research and conviction, which cannot be mastered, weighed or determined by will, but by a delicate perception, fine tact and a sensitiveness of nature. V. Lazarus, The Ethics of Judaism, I, 122 and 292.] ');">¹⁸</span> R. Johanan said on the authority of R. Simeon b. Yohai: Verbal wrong is more heinous than monetary wrong, because of the first it is written, 'and thou shalt fear thy God,' but not of the second. R. Eleazar said: The one affects his [the victim's] person, the other [only] his money. R. Samuel b. Nahmani said: For the former restoration is possible, but not for the latter. A tanna recited before R. Nahman b. Isaac: He who publicly shames<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'makes pale'. ');">¹⁹</span> his neighbour is as though he shed blood. Whereupon he remarked to him, 'You say well, because I have seen it [sc. such shaming], the ruddiness departing and paleness supervening.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Thus the blood is drained from the victim's face, which is the equivalent of shedding his blood. [V. Wiesner, J. Mag. f. Jud. Gesch. u. Lit. 1875, p. 11.] ');">²⁰</span> Abaye asked R. Dimi: What do people [most] carefully avoid in the West [sc. palestine]? — He replied: putting others to shame.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'making faces white.' ');">²¹</span> For R. Hanina said: All descend into Gehenna, excepting three. 'All' — can you really think so! But say thus: All who descend into Gehenna [subsequently] reascend, excepting three, who descend but do not reascend, viz., He who commits adultery with a married woman, publicly shames his neighbour, or fastens an evil epithet [nickname] upon his neighbour. 'Fastens an epithet' — but that is putting to shame! — [It means], Even when he is accustomed to the name.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So that he experiences no humiliation, nevertheless it is very reprehensible when the intention is evil. — It is noteworthy that apart from these three — which are obviously stated in a heightened form for the sake of emphasis (V. Tosaf.) the idea of endless Gehenna is rejected. Cf. M. Joseph, Judaism as Creed and Lie, pp. 145 seq. 'Nor do we believe in hell or in everlasting punishment&nbsp;… If suffering there is to be, it is terminable. The idea of eternal punishment is repugnant to the genius of Judaism.' ');">²²</span> Rabbah b. Bar Hanah said in R. Johanan's name: