Bava Metzia 152

הכי השתא בשלמא אי איתמר איפכא התקבל לי גיטי ואשתך אמרה הבא לי גיטי והוא אומר הילך כמו שאמרה ואמר ר"נ אמר רבה בר אבוה אמר רב משיגיע גט לידו מגורשת אלמא דאדיבורא דידה קא סמיך

How now! That were well, had the reverse been taught, thus: [If a woman said to a man,] 'Accept the divorce on my behalf;' and he [went and stated to her husband.] 'Your wife instructed me, Bring me my divorce,' [to which] he replied. 'Take it, in accordance with her instructions: and had R. Nahman ruled [thereon] in the name of Rabbah b. Abbuha in Rab's name that immediately the divorce comes into his [the agent's] hands, she is divorced; that would have proved that he [the husband] relied upon her word.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since the divorce takes effect immediately the agent accepts it. ');">¹</span>

אי נמי משהגיע גט לידה מגורשת אלמא דאדיבורא דידיה קא סמיך אלא התם משום דעקר שליח לשליחותי' לגמרי דא"ל שליח לקבלה הוינא להולכה לא הוינא

Again had he ruled that [only] when the divorce reaches her hand, is she divorced; that would shew that he relied upon the agent's statement.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And thus himself appointing him an agent to take the divorce to his wife. ');">²</span>

איבעית אימא האי תנא חזרו נמי הטעו קרי ליה דתניא השוכר את האומנין והטעו את בעל הבית או בעל הבית הטעה אותן אין להם זה על זה אלא תרעומת

But there [where R. Nahman did state his ruling], it is because the agent himself entirely cancelled<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'uprooted'. ');">³</span>

במה דברים אמורים שלא הלכו אבל הלכו חמרים ולא מצאו תבואה פועלין ומצאו שדה כשהיא לחה נותן להן שכרן משלם אבל אינו דומה הבא טעון לבא ריקן עושה מלאכה ליושב ובטל

his appointment, by declaring, 'I am willing to be an agent for acceptance, but not for delivery.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By claiming that he was an agent for acceptance when in fact he was merely authorized to bring her the divorce, he shewed unwillingness to take all that trouble, and so ipso facto cancelled his own authority. Therefore, even if the husband's assertion meant that he relied upon his wife, and the agent, moreover, subsequently changed his mind and did deliver it, the delivery is invalid, since he himself had destroyed his authority. But in the hypothetical reverse case posited by R. Ashi, the agent's statement that he was empowered only to bring it to the wife, when in fact he was authorised to accept it, did not annul his powers; if he was willing to go so far as to deliver it, he was certainly prepared for the lesser service of accepting it on the wife's behalf. ');">⁴</span>

בד"א שלא התחילו במלאכה אבל התחילו במלאכה שמין להן מה שעשו כיצד קבלו קמה לקצור בשני סלעים קצרו חציה והניחו חציה בגד לארוג בשני סלעים ארגו חציו והניחו חציו שמין להן את מה שעשו

[Reverting to the Mishnah:] If you prefer I can say, this Tanna designates retracting too, 'deceiving'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the Mishnah means that the deceit was between the employer and the labourers, one side having retracted from the agreement, and this too is called 'deceiving'. ');">⁵</span>

היה יפה ששה דינרים נותן להן סלע או יגמרו מלאכתן ויטלו שני סלעים ואם סלע נותן להם סלע

For it has been taught: If one hires labourers and they deceive the employer, or the employer deceives them, they have nothing but resentment against each other [but no legal redress]. Now, this holds good only if they have not gone [to the scene of their labour]; but if ass-drivers [are engaged to convey a load of grain from a certain place and] go [there] and find no grain, or labourers [hired to plough a field] go and find the field a swamp [unfit for ploughing], he must pay them in full; yet travelling with a load is not the same as travelling empty-handed, nor is working the same as sitting idle.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., though the labourers can claim for the loss of the day's work, and the ass-drivers likewise, a man is always prepared to accept somewhat less than a full day's wages if he is permitted to be idle that day, and it is only to that lesser sum that they are entitled. ');">⁶</span>

ר' דוסא אומר שמין להן מה שעתיד להעשות היה יפה ששה דינרים נותן להם שקל או יגמרו מלאכתן ויטלו שני סלעים ואם סלע נותן להם סלע

[Moreover,] this holds good only if they have not commenced work; but if they have commenced work, the portion done is assessed for them.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the first clause the reference is to time workers: here, to workers who contracted for the whole task, e.g., to plough a field for a fixed remuneration. ');">⁷</span>

במה דברים אמורים בדבר שאין אבוד אבל בדבר האבוד שוכר עליהן או מטען כיצד מטען אומר להן סלע קצצתי לכם באו וטלו שתים ועד כמה שוכר עליהן עד ארבעים וחמשים זוז

E.g., if they contract to harvest [a field of] standing corn for two <i>sela's</i> and they harvest half, and leave half; or to weave a garment for two <i>sela's</i>, and they weave half and leave half, the portion done is assessed: if it is worth six <i>denarii</i>, he must pay them a <i>sela'</i> [Four <i>denarii</i>], or they can complete the work and receive two <i>sela's</i>;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., if the half done is now worth six denarii, labour costs having advanced, so that the employer must pay six denarii for the other half, he must nevertheless give them the sela' (four denarii) for their half, although he thereby loses on the whole: for this Tanna rejects the view of our Mishnah that he who breaks the agreement is at a disadvantage, as explained on p. 437. n. 8. ');">⁸</span>

במה דברים אמורים בזמן שאין שם פועלים לשכור אבל יש שם פועלים לשכור ואמר צא ושכור מאלו אין לו עליהן אלא תרעומת

if it is worth a <i>sela'</i>, he must pay them a <i>sela'</i>.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' v. infra 77a. ');">⁹</span>

תני תנא קמיה דרב נותן להם שכרן משלם אמר ליה חביבי אמר אילו אנא הואי לא הוה יהיבנא להן אלא כפועל בטל ואת אמרת נותן להם שכרן משלם והא עלה קתני אינו דומה הבא טעון להבא ריקן עושה מלאכה ליושב ובטל לא סיימוה קמיה

R. Dosa said: That which still remains to be done is assessed. [Thus:] if it is worth six <i>denarii</i>, he pays them a <i>shekel</i> [two <i>denarii</i>], or they can complete their work and receive two <i>sela's</i><span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Dosa agreeing with the Tanna of our Mishnah. ');">¹⁰</span>

איכא דאמרי סיימוה קמיה והכי קאמר חביבי אמר אי הואי אנא לא הוה יהיבנא ליה כלל ואת אמרת כפועל בטל אלא קשיא הך

if a <i>sela'</i>, he must pay them a <i>sela'</i>. Now, this holds good only if there is no irretrievable loss [if the work is postponed until fresh labourers are found]; but if there is, he can engage [workers] at their cost, or deceive them. How does he deceive them? He says to them, 'I have promised you a <i>sela'</i>; come and receive two.' To what extent may he engage [workers] against them? Even to forty or fifty <i>zuz</i>.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., he may even pay fresh workers for the remainder much more then the first were to receive for the whole, and recoup himself from the first batch. ');">¹¹</span>

לא קשיא הא דסיירא לארעיה מדאורתא הא דלא סיירא לארעיה מאורתא

But when is this said, [only] if no artisans are available for hiring;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hence he must pay far above the normal. ');">¹²</span>

כי הא דאמר רבא האי מאן דאגר אגירי לרפקא ואתא מטרא ומלייה מיא אי סיירא לארעיה מאורתא

but if there are, and he [the first worker] says to him, 'Go out and engage one of these,' he has nothing but resentment against him.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In any case the term 'deceiving' is employed in this Baraitha to denote 'retracting' and so likewise in our Mishnah. ');">¹³</span> A tanna recited before Rab:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In connection with the above: 'if the ass-drivers went and found no grain etc.' ');">¹⁴</span> He must pay them in full. Whereupon he [Rab] observed: My uncle [R. Hiyya] said, 'Were it I, I would have paid them only as unemployed labourers:'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As explained on p. 441, n. 6; cf. also p. 398, n. 2. ');">¹⁵</span> yet you say. 'he must pay them in full'! But surely, it is taught thereon: But travelling with a load is not the same as travelling empty-handed, nor is working the same as idling! — Now it [the Baraitha] had not been completed before him [Rab].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., when the tanna recited the Baraitha and said 'he must pay in full', he went no further, whereupon Rab observed that his uncle's view differed. ');">¹⁶</span> Others say, it had been completed before him,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the Tanna had added, 'but travelling with a load etc.', and yet Rab observed that his uncle differed. ');">¹⁷</span> and he [Rab] observed thus: My uncle said, 'Were it I, I would not have paid him at all';<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It was their misfortune that the field proved to be a marsh. ');">¹⁸</span> yet you say [he must pay him] as an unemployed labourer! But this [Baraitha] opposes it! — There is no difficulty: the latter ruling is if he viewed the field the previous evening; the former, if he did not.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Rashi: if the labourer inspected the field the previous evening, he has no claim now, since when he undertook to plough it, he saw the condition of the field. Maim: If the land owner inspected it the previous evening, found it fit, and engaged workers, but overnight heavy rains turned it into a swamp, the labourers have no redress, since it was not the employer's fault. ');">¹⁹</span> Just as Raba said: If one engaged labourers to cut dykes, and rain fell and rendered it [the land] waterlogged [making work impossible], if he inspected it the previous evening,