Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility Skip to content

Today's Daf Yomi

November 30, 2016 | 讻状讟 讘诪专讞砖讜讜谉 转砖注状讝

  • This month's learning is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Zoom group for their kindness, support, and care during a medically challenging year.

Bava Metzia 65

If one takes interest forbidden by the Torah, according to rabbi Elazar, the court can force him to return it. 聽Various cases are brought in which the interest was different than they had agreed upon. 聽In each case, does the lender need to return what was agreed upon or what he actually received? 聽 The mishna distinguishes between rentals and sales in terms of agreeing to a higher price if the buyer/renter pays at a later date. 聽In rental contracts it is allowed because generally rentals are paid at the end so there is no benefit to paying at the end as that is what is expected. 聽This is different from a sale where money is generally paid from the beginning. 聽Some rabbis each try to explain cases from their business practices explaining how they justify that they charge a higher rate聽to those who pay at a later date. 聽If a buyer pays only part of the money and says he will pay the rest later, what happens in the interim period? 聽Can either side eat the produce? 聽A braita is brought which explains that there are 4 possible options – depending on what the wording of the agreement was.


If the lesson doesn't play, click "Download"

讚谞讬讞讗 诇讬讛 讚诇讗 谞住转专讬 注讘讚讬讛

as it is satisfactory for the master that the work habits of his slave not be undone.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讛讬讻讗 讚诇讗 诪住讬拽 讘讬讛 讝讜讝讬 诪专 讻讬讜谉 讚诪住讬拽 讘讛讜 讝讜讝讬 诪讞讝讬 讻专讘讬转 讚讗诪专 专讘 讬讜住祝 讘专 诪谞讬讜诪讬 讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讗诪专讜 讛讚专 讘讞爪专 讞讘讬专讜 砖诇讗 诪讚注转讜 讗讬谞讜 爪专讬讱 诇讛注诇讜转 诇讜 砖讻专 讛诇讜讛讜 讜讚专 讘讞爪讬专讜 爪专讬讱 诇讛注诇讜转 诇讜 砖讻专 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛讚专讬 讘讬

Rava said to him: This statement of Rav Daniel applies when the one who seizes the slave is not owed money by the owner of the slave. But since the Master is owed money by the owner of the slave, this has the appearance of interest, as Rav Yosef bar Minyumi says that Rav Na岣an says: Even though the Sages said that one who resides in another鈥檚 courtyard without his knowledge does not have to pay him rent, nevertheless, if he lent a courtyard owner money and then resides in his courtyard, the lender must pay him rent. Rav Yosef bar 岣ma said to him: I retract my opinion, and I will no longer seize the slaves of my debtors.

讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讛讗讬 诪讗谉 讚诪住讬拽 讝讜讝讗 讚专讬讘讬转讗 讘讞讘专讬讛 讜拽讗 讗讝诇讬 讞讟讬 讗专讘注讛 讙专讬讜讬 讘讝讜讝讗 讘砖讜拽讗 讜讬讛讬讘 诇讬讛 讗讬讛讜 讞诪砖讛 讻讬 诪驻拽讬谞谉 诪讬谞讬讛 讗专讘注讛 诪驻拽讬谞谉 诪讬谞讬讛 讗讬讚讱 讗讜讝讜诇讬 讛讜讗 讚拽讗 诪讜讝讬诇 讙讘讬讛 专讘讗 讗诪专 讞诪砖讛 诪驻拽讬谞谉 诪讬谞讬讛 讚诪注讬拽专讗 讘转讜专转 专讬讘讬转讗 讗转讗讬 诇讬讚讬讛

Abaye said: In the case of this one, who was owed a dinar of interest by another, and wheat was going for the price of four se鈥檃 [gerivei] for a dinar in the market, and the borrower gave the lender five se鈥檃 of wheat as the interest payment, when we, the court, remove the interest the lender took from the borrower, we remove only four se鈥檃, worth one dinar, from the lender. As the other, additional se鈥檃 is a discount he granted him, it is merely a favor, not counted as part of the interest. Rava said: We take all five se鈥檃 from him, as all of the wheat initially came into his possession in the form of interest, and therefore it is all classified as interest.

讜讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讛讗讬 诪讗谉 讚诪住讬拽 讗专讘注讛 讝讜讝讬 讚专讬讘讬转讗 讘讞讘专讬讛 讜讬讛讬讘 诇讬讛 讙诇讬诪讗 讘讙讜讬讬讛讜 讻讬 诪驻拽讬谞谉 诪讬谞讬讛 讗专讘注讛 诪驻拽讬谞谉 诪讬谞讬讛 讙诇讬诪讗 诇讗 诪驻拽讬谞谉 诪讬谞讬讛 专讘讗 讗诪专 讙诇讬诪讗 诪驻拽讬谞谉 诪讬谞讬讛 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讻讬 讛讬讻讬 讚诇讗 诇讬诪专讜 讙诇讬诪讗 讚诪讻住讬 讜拽讗讬 讙诇讬诪讗 讚专讬讘讬转讗 讛讜讗

And Abaye said: In the case of this one, who was owed four dinars of interest by another, and the borrower gave him a cloak as payment for it, when we take the interest from the lender we take four dinars from him, but we do not take the actual cloak from him, as the giving of the cloak is considered a sale. Rava said: We take the cloak from him. What is the reason for this? So that people should not say that the cloak so-and-so is wearing is a cloak procured as interest.

讗诪专 专讘讗 讛讗讬 诪讗谉 讚诪住讬拽 转专讬住专 讝讜讝讬 讚专讬讘讬转讗 讘讞讘专讬讛 讜讗讙专 诇讬讛 讞爪专 讚诪转讙专讗 讘注砖专讛 讜讗讜讙专讬讛 谞讛诇讬讛 讘转专讬住专 讻讬 诪驻拽讬谞谉 诪讬谞讬讛 转专讬住专 诪驻拽讬谞谉 诪讬谞讬讛

Rava further said: Consider the case of this one, who was owed twelve dinars of interest by another, and the lender rented a courtyard from the borrower that was generally rented for ten dinars, but he rented it to him with the price inflated to twelve dinars. The borrower agreed to forgo the entire rental payment, thereby effectively repaying the twelve dinars of interest. When we take the interest from the lender we take twelve dinars from him to pay for the rental, as this was the amount of interest he is considered to have collected from him.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 讗讞讗 诪讚驻转讬 诇专讘讬谞讗 讜诇讬诪讗 诇讬讛 讻讬 讗讙专讗 讛讻讬 讚讛讜讛 拽讗 诪砖转专砖讬 诇讬 讛砖转讗 讚诇讗 诪砖转专砖讬 诇讬 讻讚讗讙专讬 讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 讛讜讗 讚讗讙专谞讗 诪砖讜诐 讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 住讘专转 讜拽讘诇转

Rav A岣 of Difti said to Ravina: But let the lender say to the borrower: If I were to rent it now, I would pay not twelve dinars, but only ten. As when I rented it from you at the higher price it was because I profited from it by not having to pay for it, but now that I am not profiting, I will rent it as everyone else rents, for ten. The Gemara responds: This claim is rejected, as we say to him: You considered and willingly accepted it for the price of twelve dinars.

诪转谞讬壮 诪专讘讬谉 注诇 讛砖讻专 讜讗讬谉 诪专讘讬谉 注诇 讛诪讻专 讻讬爪讚 讛砖讻讬专 诇讜 讗转 讞爪专讜 讜讗诪专 诇讜 讗诐 诪注讻砖讬讜 讗转讛 谞讜转谉 诇讬 讛专讬 讛讜讗 诇讱 讘注砖专 住诇注讬诐 诇砖谞讛 讜讗诐 砖诇 讞讜讚砖 讘讞讜讚砖 住诇注 诇讞讜讚砖 诪讜转专 诪讻专 诇讜 讗转 砖讚讛讜 讜讗诪专 诇讜 讗诐 诪注讻砖讬讜 讗转讛 谞讜转谉 诇讬 讛专讬 讛讬讗 砖诇讱 讘讗诇祝 讝讜讝 讗诐 诇讙讜专谉 讘砖谞讬诐 注砖专 诪谞讛 讗住讜专

MISHNA: One may increase the price of rent to be received at a later date instead of at an earlier one, but one may not similarly increase the price of a sale. How so? If a courtyard owner rented his courtyard to a renter, and the owner said to the renter: If you give me the payment now, the rental is yours for ten sela a year, but if you pay on a monthly basis it will cost a sela for each month, equaling twelve sela a year. Such a practice is permitted, despite the fact that he charges more for a monthly payment. If a field owner sold his field to a buyer and said to him: If you give me the payment now, it is yours for one thousand dinars, but if you wait and pay me at the time of the harvest, it is yours for twelve hundred dinars, this transaction is prohibited as interest.

讙诪壮 诪讗讬 砖谞讗 专讬砖讗 讜诪讗讬 砖谞讗 住讬驻讗 专讘讛 讜专讘 讬讜住祝 讚讗诪专讬 转专讜讬讬讛讜 砖讻讬专讜转 讗讬谞讛 诪砖转诇诪转 讗诇讗 讘住讜祝 讜讛讗讬 讻讬讜谉 讚诇讗 诪讟讗 讝诪谞讬讛 诇诪讬讙讘讗 诇讗讜 讗讙专 谞讟专 诇讬讛 诪砖讜讜讗 讛讜讗 讚讛讻讬 砖讜讬讗 讜讛讗讬 讚拽讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗诐 诪注讻砖讬讜 讗转讛 谞讜转谉 诇讬 讛专讬 讛讜讗 诇讱 讘注砖专 住诇注讬诐 诇砖谞讛 讗讜讝讜诇讬 讛讜讗 讚拽讗 诪讜讝讬诇 讙讘讬讛

gemara The Gemara poses a question: What is different in the first clause of the mishna, and what is different in the latter clause? Why is the additional charge for later payment permitted in the case of rent but prohibited in the case of a sale? Rabba and Rav Yosef both say: The halakha is that the obligation to pay a rental fee is incurred only at the end of the rental period, and therefore, in this case, since its time to be claimed had not yet arrived at the beginning of the rental, the early payment is not considered payment for waiting. Rather, the opposite is the case: This higher price is the value it is worth, and that which he says to him: If you give me payment now it is yours for ten sela a year, is a discount that he offers him for the early payment, and therefore it is not interest.

住讬驻讗 讻讬讜谉 讚讝讘讬谞讬 谞讬谞讛讜 讜讘注讬 诇诪砖拽诇 讚诪讬 诪注讻砖讬讜 讛诇讻讱 讗讙专 谞讟专 诇讬讛 讛讜讗 讜讗住讜专 讗诪专 专讘讗 讚拽讜 讘讛 专讘谞谉 讘讛讗 诪讬诇转讗 讜讗讜拽诪讜讛 讗拽专讗 讻砖讻讬专 砖谞讛 讘砖谞讛 砖讻讬专讜转 砖诇 砖谞讛 讝讜 讗讬谞讛 诪砖转诇诪转 讗诇讗 讘砖谞讛 讗讞专转

By contrast, in the latter clause, since it is a sale, and the owner of the field wants to take the money from now, if he agrees to a later payment at a higher price, this is therefore considered payment for waiting, and it is forbidden. Rava said: The Sages examined this matter closely and established that this halakha is derived from the verse that states: 鈥淟ike a hired laborer, year by year鈥 (Leviticus 25:53). It is derived from this verse that the obligation to pay the rental fee of this year is incurred only in the following year.

讜讗诐 诇讙讜专谉 讘砖谞讬诐 注砖专 诪谞讛 讗住讜专 讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讟专砖讗 砖专讬

搂 The mishna teaches: If the field owner said: But if you wait and pay me at the time of the harvest, the field is yours for twelve hundred dinars, this is prohibited. Rav Na岣an said: Tacit interest [tarsha] is permitted. In other words, one may make a contract for a sale with a later payment date at an increased price, as long as he does not specify that the higher price is due to the delay but merely states a price and a date.

讗讬转讬讘讬讛 专诪讬 讘专 讞诪讗 诇专讘 谞讞诪谉 讜讗诪专讬 诇讛 专讘 注讜拽讘讗 讘专 讞诪讗 诇专讘 谞讞诪谉 讜讗诐 诇讙讜专谉 讘砖谞讬诐 注砖专 诪谞讛 讗住讜专 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛转诐 拽抓 诇讬讛 讛讻讗 诇讗 拽抓 诇讬讛

Rami bar 岣ma raised an objection to Rav Na岣an, and some say it was Rav Ukva bar 岣ma who raised the objection to Rav Na岣an: The mishna states: But if you wait and pay me at the time of the harvest, the field is yours for twelve hundred dinars, this is prohibited. Rav Na岣an said to him: There is a difference between the two cases. There, in the case of the mishna, he fixed the price for him as interest, as he explicitly stated that there was an additional cost for a later payment, whereas here, in the case concerning which I stated my ruling, he did not fix it for him as interest, but merely quoted a higher price.

讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 讟专砖讗 讚讬讚讬 砖专讬 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 砖讻专讗讬 诇讗 驻住讬讚 讝讜讝讬 诇讗 爪专讬讻谞讗 讗谞讗 讛讜讗 讚拽讗 注讘讬讚谞讗 诪讬诇转讗 讙讘讬 诇讜拽讞

Rav Pappa said: My tacit interest arrangement that I offer customers, where I sell my liquor at the times when the market price is low and agree to have the buyer pay me for it later on when the market price is higher, is permitted. What is the reason for this? My liquor would not be lost were I to store it for a while, and I do not need money at the present time. I could therefore simply hold it to sell at a higher price later. I sell it early because it is I who am performing a beneficial matter for the customer, by selling it to him earlier without demanding immediate payment, and this is not interest.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 砖砖转 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 讗讬讚讬 诇专讘 驻驻讗 诪讗讬 讞讝讬 诪专 讚拽讗 讗讝诇转 讘转专 讚讬讚讱 讝讬诇 讘转专 讚讬讚讛讜 讚讗讬诇讜 讛讜讜 诇讛讜 讝讜讝讬 讛讜讜 砖拽诇讬 讻讬 讛砖转讗 讛砖转讗 讚诇讬转 诇讛讜 讝讜讝讬 砖拽诇讬 讻讬讜拽专讗 讚诇拽诪讬讛

Rav Sheshet, son of Rav Idi, said to Rav Pappa: What does the Master see to indicate that you should follow yourself, i.e., consider this matter from your perspective, and therefore conclude that it is permitted because you are not earning interest? You could equally follow their side, and consider the matter from the perspective of your customers, as, if they had money available they would buy liquor at the current price, but now that they have no money available they buy it in accordance with the future, more expensive rate. Consequently, they are actually paying interest in exchange for the delay in payment. Rav Pappa did not respond.

讗诪专 专讘 讞诪讗 讟专砖讗 讚讬讚讬 讜讚讗讬 砖专讬

Rav 岣ma said: My tacit interest arrangement is certainly permitted. He would contract to sell merchandise in a location where its price was low while setting the price according to the more expensive rate in effect in a different location. Those who would purchase the merchandise from him would then take the merchandise to the other location to sell at the highest price, while Rav 岣ma would accept upon himself a certain measure of responsibility for the risks incurred during transport. This deal is considered a sales partnership, not interest.

诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 谞讬讞讗 诇讛讜 讚诇讬拽讜 讘专砖讜转讬 讚讻诇 讛讬讻讗 讚拽讗 讗讝诇讬 砖讘拽讬 诇讛讜 诪讻住讗 讜谞拽讜讟 诇讛讜 砖讜拽讗

What is the reason for this? Rav 岣ma said: It is convenient for them that the merchandise remains established in my domain, as anywhere that they go, the authorities leave them alone with regard to taxes and other people maintain the market for these sellers. The merchants selling Rav 岣ma鈥檚 wares received preferential treatment, as Rav 岣ma was a scholar from the house of the Exilarch, whose members would receive assistance from all. The higher price they paid was in consideration for these advantages; it was not payment for waiting.

讜讛诇讻转讗 讻专讘 讞诪讗 讜讛诇讻转讗 讻专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讜讛诇讻转讗 讻专讘讬 讬谞讗讬 讚讗诪专 诪讛 诇讬 讛谉 讜诪讛 诇讬 讚诪讬讛谉

The Gemara summarizes the rulings in a number of the cases discussed above: And the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rav 岣ma, that his type of tacit interest agreement is permitted. And the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, that fixed interest can be reclaimed in court. And the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yannai, who says: What difference is it to me if he referred to the produce, and what difference is it to me if he referred to the produce鈥檚 value? In other words, if one gave an item or money to another as payment of his loan, this is considered a sale without interest.

诪转谞讬壮 诪讻专 诇讜 讗转 讛砖讚讛 讜谞转谉 诇讜 诪拽爪转 讚诪讬诐 讜讗诪专 诇讜 讗讬诪转讬 砖转专爪讛 讛讘讗 诪注讜转 讜讟讜诇 讗转 砖诇讱 讗住讜专 讛诇讜讛讜 注诇 砖讚讛讜 讜讗诪专 诇讜 讗诐 讗讬 讗转讛 谞讜转谉 诇讬 诪讻讗谉 讜注讚 砖诇砖 砖谞讬诐 讛专讬 讛讬讗 砖诇讬 讛专讬 讛讬讗 砖诇讜 讜讻讱 讛讬讛 讘讬转讜住 讘谉 讝讜谞讬谉 注讜砖讛 注诇 驻讬 讞讻诪讬诐

MISHNA: If one sold another a field and the buyer gave him some of the money, and the seller said to him: Whenever you wish, bring the outstanding money and take your field at that point, this is prohibited. If one lent money to another on the basis of the borrower鈥檚 field serving as a guarantee, and said to him: If you do not give me the money now and instead delay your payment from now until three years have passed, the field is mine, then after three years, the field is his. This is permitted even if the field is worth more than the amount of the loan. And this is what Baitos ben Zunin would do, with the consent of the Sages, when he lent money.

讙诪壮 诪讬 讗讜讻诇 驻讬专讜转 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗诪专 诪讜讻专 讗讜讻诇 驻讬专讜转 专讘 注谞谉 讗诪专 诪砖诇砖讬谉 讗转 讛驻讬专讜转 讜诇讗 驻诇讬讙讬 讛讗 讚讗诪专 诇讻讬 诪讬讬转讬转 拽谞讬 讛讗 讚讗诪专 诇讻讬 诪讬讬转讬转 拽谞讬 诪注讻砖讬讜

GEMARA: The ruling of the mishna is unclear, as it requires clarification: In a sale such as this, when the buyer has made only a partial payment, who enjoys the profits of this field in the interim period, until the entire transaction is complete? Rav Huna says: The seller enjoys the profits until he receives the full payment, while Rav Anan says: In the meantime they deposit the profits in escrow with a third party until the transaction is finalized. The Gemara comments: And Rav Huna and Rav Anan do not disagree. This one is referring to a case where the seller says: When you bring all the money you will acquire the field, whereas that one is referring to a case where he says at the time of the transaction: When you bring all the money you will acquire it from now.

转谞讬 专讘 住驻专讗 讘专讘讬转 讚讘讬 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 驻注诪讬诐 砖砖谞讬讛诐 诪讜转专讬谉 驻注诪讬诐 砖砖谞讬讛诐 讗住讜专讬谉 讜驻注诪讬诐 砖讛诪讜讻专 诪讜转专 讜诇讜拽讞 讗住讜专 讜驻注诪讬诐 砖讛诇讜拽讞 诪讜转专 讜诪讜讻专 讗住讜专

The Gemara relates: Rav Safra taught the following halakhot of interest as a baraita of the school of Rabbi 岣yya: Sometimes they are both permitted to enjoy the profits of the field, as this does not constitute interest at all; sometimes they are both prohibited from doing so. And sometimes it is permitted for the seller to enjoy the profits of the field but it is prohibited for the buyer to do so; and sometimes it is permitted for the buyer to enjoy the profits of the field and it is prohibited for the seller to do so.

注谞讬 专讘讗 讘转专讬讛 驻注诪讬诐 砖砖谞讬讛诐 诪讜转专讬谉 讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 拽谞讬 讻砖讬注讜专 讝讜讝讱 驻注诪讬诐 砖砖谞讬讛诐 讗住讜专讬谉 讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 诇讻讬 诪讬讬转讬转 拽谞讬 诪注讻砖讬讜

When Rav Safra taught this baraita, Rava answered after him, in explanation: Sometimes they are both permitted to benefit from the field. For example, if the seller said to him: Acquire the field for yourself in accordance with the measure of your money, he effectively acquires the field incrementally in small portions, which is certainly permitted. Sometimes they are both prohibited from benefiting from the field. For example, if the seller said to him: When you bring the money you will acquire it all from now, if the seller enjoys the profits until the remainder of the money is paid, he has clearly taken interest. If the buyer does not make the final payment, the field will remain the property of the seller and his partial payment will be returned, and the field will be considered a loan given to the seller. If the buyer enjoys the profits of the field in the interim, he will have taken interest.

驻注诪讬诐 诪讜讻专 诪讜转专 讜诇讜拽讞 讗住讜专 讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 诇讻讬 诪讬讬转讬转 拽谞讬 驻注诪讬诐 砖讛诇讜拽讞 诪讜转专 讜诪讜讻专 讗住讜专 讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 拽谞讬 诪注讻砖讬讜 讜讝讜讝讗讬 诇讛讜讜 讛诇讜讗讛 讙讘讱

Rava continues: Sometimes the seller is permitted to benefit from the field and the buyer is prohibited from benefiting from it, i.e., the transaction is considered interest from the perspective of the buyer but not the seller. For example, if the seller said to him: When you bring the money you will acquire the field. And sometimes the buyer is permitted to benefit from the field and the seller is prohibited from benefiting from it. For example, if the seller said to him: Acquire it from now, and the money you still owe me will be considered a loan in your possession. In this case, if the seller enjoys the profits he benefits from the extended payment of the loan.

诪讗谉 转谞讗 砖谞讬讛诐 讗住讜专讬谉 讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 讬讛讜砖注 讚诇讗 讻专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讚讗讬 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讛讗诪专 爪讚 讗讞讚 讘专讘讬转 诪讜转专

The Gemara poses a question: Who is the tanna who taught that they are both prohibited from benefiting from the field if he says: When you bring the money you will acquire it from now? Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, says that the opinion of this tanna is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda. As, if it is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, doesn鈥檛 Rabbi Yehuda say that uncertain interest is permitted? In this case as well, it is uncertain whether the arrangement will result in the payment of interest, as it depends on whether or not the rest of the payment is given.

诪砖讻谉 诇讜 讘讬转 诪砖讻谉 诇讜 砖讚讛 讜讗诪专 诇讜 诇讻砖转专爪讛 诇诪讜讻专诐 诇讗 转诪讻专诐 讗诇讗 诇讬 讘讚诪讬诐 讛诇诇讜 讗住讜专 讘砖讜讬讬讛谉 诪讜转专

搂 It is taught in a baraita: If a borrower pledged a house to the lender or pledged a field to him as a guarantee for the loan, and the lender said to the borrower: When you want to sell the house or the field, you must sell them only to me for this specified monetary value, it is prohibited, as the selling of the field for a low price is considered interest paid in exchange for the granting of the loan. But if he said: You must sell them to me according to their value at the time of the sale, this is permitted.

诪讗谉 转谞讗 讘讚诪讬诐 讛诇诇讜 讗住讜专 讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 讬讛讜砖注 讚诇讗 讻专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讚讗讬 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讛讗诪专 爪讚 讗讞讚 讘专讘讬转 诪讜转专

The Gemara asks: Who is the tanna who taught that if he said: You must sell them only to me for this specified monetary value, it is prohibited? Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, said that it is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda. As, if it is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, doesn鈥檛 Rabbi Yehuda say that uncertain interest is permitted? The interest in this case is uncertain, as there is no guarantee that the sale will ever be implemented.

诪讻专 诇讜 讘讬转 诪讻专 诇讜 砖讚讛 讜讗诪专 诇讜 诇讻砖讬讛讬讜 诇讬 诪注讜转 讛讞讝讬专诐 诇讬 讗住讜专 诇讻砖讬讛讬讜 诇讱 诪注讜转 讗讞讝讬专诐 诇讱 诪讜转专 诪讗谉 转谞讗 讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 讬讛讜砖注 讚诇讗 讻专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讚讗讬 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讛讗诪专 爪讚 讗讞讚 讘专讘讬转 诪讜转专

If one sold another a house or sold him a field, and said to the buyer: When I have money, give the property back to me in exchange for the return of the money that you paid for it, it is prohibited, as this transaction is essentially a loan, with the buyer enjoying the profits of the field in the interim. But if the buyer said to him of his own accord: When you have money I will return the property to you, this is permitted. The Gemara again asks: Who is the tanna who taught this ruling? Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, said that it is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda. As, if it is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, doesn鈥檛 Rabbi Yehuda say that uncertain interest is permitted?

诪讗讬 砖谞讗 专讬砖讗 讜诪讗讬 砖谞讗 住讬驻讗 讗诪专 专讘讗 专讬砖讗 讚诇讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪讚注转讬讛 住讬驻讗 讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪讚注转讬讛

The Gemara asks: What is different in the first clause and what is different in the latter clause? Why does it matter who stated the condition? Rava says: The first clause is referring to a situation where the seller did not tell the buyer that the decision to return the field will be of the buyer鈥檚 own accord, but made it a condition of the sale. Consequently, the seller always retains the option to return the money and recover his field, which means it was essentially a loan with the temporary use of the field serving as a substitute for interest. Conversely, in the latter clause, it is referring to a situation where the buyer said he would return the field of his own accord. Since the buyer can choose to keep the field, it is a proper sale.

讛讛讜讗 讙讘专讗 讚讝讘讬谉 诇讬讛 讗专注讗 诇讞讘专讬讛 砖诇讗 讘讗讞专讬讜转 讞讝讬讬讛 讚讛讜讛 拽讗 注爪讬讘 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗诪讗讬 注爪讬讘转 讗讬 讟专驻讜 诇讛 诪讬谞讱 诪讙讘讬谞讗 诇讱 砖讜驻专讗 砖讘讞讗 讜驻讬专讬

搂 The Gemara relates: There was a certain man who sold land to another without a guarantee that if the field is repossessed, the seller will compensate the buyer for his loss. He observed that the buyer was distressed, as he was concerned that the field might have been designated as a pledge to a creditor and would be taken from him, which would cause him to lose his investment. The seller said to the buyer: Why are you distressed? If the creditor seizes the field from you, I will pay you from my best-quality land, and I will also provide compensation for your investment in the improvement of the field, and in addition, I will give you the value of any produce taken from you.

讗诪专 讗诪讬诪专

Later, the legal status of this promise was called into question. Ameimar said:

  • This month's learning is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Zoom group for their kindness, support, and care during a medically challenging year.

Want to explore more about the Daf?

See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners

Sorry, there aren't any posts in this category yet. We're adding more soon!

Bava Metzia 65

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Bava Metzia 65

讚谞讬讞讗 诇讬讛 讚诇讗 谞住转专讬 注讘讚讬讛

as it is satisfactory for the master that the work habits of his slave not be undone.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讛讬讻讗 讚诇讗 诪住讬拽 讘讬讛 讝讜讝讬 诪专 讻讬讜谉 讚诪住讬拽 讘讛讜 讝讜讝讬 诪讞讝讬 讻专讘讬转 讚讗诪专 专讘 讬讜住祝 讘专 诪谞讬讜诪讬 讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讗诪专讜 讛讚专 讘讞爪专 讞讘讬专讜 砖诇讗 诪讚注转讜 讗讬谞讜 爪专讬讱 诇讛注诇讜转 诇讜 砖讻专 讛诇讜讛讜 讜讚专 讘讞爪讬专讜 爪专讬讱 诇讛注诇讜转 诇讜 砖讻专 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛讚专讬 讘讬

Rava said to him: This statement of Rav Daniel applies when the one who seizes the slave is not owed money by the owner of the slave. But since the Master is owed money by the owner of the slave, this has the appearance of interest, as Rav Yosef bar Minyumi says that Rav Na岣an says: Even though the Sages said that one who resides in another鈥檚 courtyard without his knowledge does not have to pay him rent, nevertheless, if he lent a courtyard owner money and then resides in his courtyard, the lender must pay him rent. Rav Yosef bar 岣ma said to him: I retract my opinion, and I will no longer seize the slaves of my debtors.

讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讛讗讬 诪讗谉 讚诪住讬拽 讝讜讝讗 讚专讬讘讬转讗 讘讞讘专讬讛 讜拽讗 讗讝诇讬 讞讟讬 讗专讘注讛 讙专讬讜讬 讘讝讜讝讗 讘砖讜拽讗 讜讬讛讬讘 诇讬讛 讗讬讛讜 讞诪砖讛 讻讬 诪驻拽讬谞谉 诪讬谞讬讛 讗专讘注讛 诪驻拽讬谞谉 诪讬谞讬讛 讗讬讚讱 讗讜讝讜诇讬 讛讜讗 讚拽讗 诪讜讝讬诇 讙讘讬讛 专讘讗 讗诪专 讞诪砖讛 诪驻拽讬谞谉 诪讬谞讬讛 讚诪注讬拽专讗 讘转讜专转 专讬讘讬转讗 讗转讗讬 诇讬讚讬讛

Abaye said: In the case of this one, who was owed a dinar of interest by another, and wheat was going for the price of four se鈥檃 [gerivei] for a dinar in the market, and the borrower gave the lender five se鈥檃 of wheat as the interest payment, when we, the court, remove the interest the lender took from the borrower, we remove only four se鈥檃, worth one dinar, from the lender. As the other, additional se鈥檃 is a discount he granted him, it is merely a favor, not counted as part of the interest. Rava said: We take all five se鈥檃 from him, as all of the wheat initially came into his possession in the form of interest, and therefore it is all classified as interest.

讜讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讛讗讬 诪讗谉 讚诪住讬拽 讗专讘注讛 讝讜讝讬 讚专讬讘讬转讗 讘讞讘专讬讛 讜讬讛讬讘 诇讬讛 讙诇讬诪讗 讘讙讜讬讬讛讜 讻讬 诪驻拽讬谞谉 诪讬谞讬讛 讗专讘注讛 诪驻拽讬谞谉 诪讬谞讬讛 讙诇讬诪讗 诇讗 诪驻拽讬谞谉 诪讬谞讬讛 专讘讗 讗诪专 讙诇讬诪讗 诪驻拽讬谞谉 诪讬谞讬讛 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讻讬 讛讬讻讬 讚诇讗 诇讬诪专讜 讙诇讬诪讗 讚诪讻住讬 讜拽讗讬 讙诇讬诪讗 讚专讬讘讬转讗 讛讜讗

And Abaye said: In the case of this one, who was owed four dinars of interest by another, and the borrower gave him a cloak as payment for it, when we take the interest from the lender we take four dinars from him, but we do not take the actual cloak from him, as the giving of the cloak is considered a sale. Rava said: We take the cloak from him. What is the reason for this? So that people should not say that the cloak so-and-so is wearing is a cloak procured as interest.

讗诪专 专讘讗 讛讗讬 诪讗谉 讚诪住讬拽 转专讬住专 讝讜讝讬 讚专讬讘讬转讗 讘讞讘专讬讛 讜讗讙专 诇讬讛 讞爪专 讚诪转讙专讗 讘注砖专讛 讜讗讜讙专讬讛 谞讛诇讬讛 讘转专讬住专 讻讬 诪驻拽讬谞谉 诪讬谞讬讛 转专讬住专 诪驻拽讬谞谉 诪讬谞讬讛

Rava further said: Consider the case of this one, who was owed twelve dinars of interest by another, and the lender rented a courtyard from the borrower that was generally rented for ten dinars, but he rented it to him with the price inflated to twelve dinars. The borrower agreed to forgo the entire rental payment, thereby effectively repaying the twelve dinars of interest. When we take the interest from the lender we take twelve dinars from him to pay for the rental, as this was the amount of interest he is considered to have collected from him.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 讗讞讗 诪讚驻转讬 诇专讘讬谞讗 讜诇讬诪讗 诇讬讛 讻讬 讗讙专讗 讛讻讬 讚讛讜讛 拽讗 诪砖转专砖讬 诇讬 讛砖转讗 讚诇讗 诪砖转专砖讬 诇讬 讻讚讗讙专讬 讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 讛讜讗 讚讗讙专谞讗 诪砖讜诐 讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 住讘专转 讜拽讘诇转

Rav A岣 of Difti said to Ravina: But let the lender say to the borrower: If I were to rent it now, I would pay not twelve dinars, but only ten. As when I rented it from you at the higher price it was because I profited from it by not having to pay for it, but now that I am not profiting, I will rent it as everyone else rents, for ten. The Gemara responds: This claim is rejected, as we say to him: You considered and willingly accepted it for the price of twelve dinars.

诪转谞讬壮 诪专讘讬谉 注诇 讛砖讻专 讜讗讬谉 诪专讘讬谉 注诇 讛诪讻专 讻讬爪讚 讛砖讻讬专 诇讜 讗转 讞爪专讜 讜讗诪专 诇讜 讗诐 诪注讻砖讬讜 讗转讛 谞讜转谉 诇讬 讛专讬 讛讜讗 诇讱 讘注砖专 住诇注讬诐 诇砖谞讛 讜讗诐 砖诇 讞讜讚砖 讘讞讜讚砖 住诇注 诇讞讜讚砖 诪讜转专 诪讻专 诇讜 讗转 砖讚讛讜 讜讗诪专 诇讜 讗诐 诪注讻砖讬讜 讗转讛 谞讜转谉 诇讬 讛专讬 讛讬讗 砖诇讱 讘讗诇祝 讝讜讝 讗诐 诇讙讜专谉 讘砖谞讬诐 注砖专 诪谞讛 讗住讜专

MISHNA: One may increase the price of rent to be received at a later date instead of at an earlier one, but one may not similarly increase the price of a sale. How so? If a courtyard owner rented his courtyard to a renter, and the owner said to the renter: If you give me the payment now, the rental is yours for ten sela a year, but if you pay on a monthly basis it will cost a sela for each month, equaling twelve sela a year. Such a practice is permitted, despite the fact that he charges more for a monthly payment. If a field owner sold his field to a buyer and said to him: If you give me the payment now, it is yours for one thousand dinars, but if you wait and pay me at the time of the harvest, it is yours for twelve hundred dinars, this transaction is prohibited as interest.

讙诪壮 诪讗讬 砖谞讗 专讬砖讗 讜诪讗讬 砖谞讗 住讬驻讗 专讘讛 讜专讘 讬讜住祝 讚讗诪专讬 转专讜讬讬讛讜 砖讻讬专讜转 讗讬谞讛 诪砖转诇诪转 讗诇讗 讘住讜祝 讜讛讗讬 讻讬讜谉 讚诇讗 诪讟讗 讝诪谞讬讛 诇诪讬讙讘讗 诇讗讜 讗讙专 谞讟专 诇讬讛 诪砖讜讜讗 讛讜讗 讚讛讻讬 砖讜讬讗 讜讛讗讬 讚拽讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗诐 诪注讻砖讬讜 讗转讛 谞讜转谉 诇讬 讛专讬 讛讜讗 诇讱 讘注砖专 住诇注讬诐 诇砖谞讛 讗讜讝讜诇讬 讛讜讗 讚拽讗 诪讜讝讬诇 讙讘讬讛

gemara The Gemara poses a question: What is different in the first clause of the mishna, and what is different in the latter clause? Why is the additional charge for later payment permitted in the case of rent but prohibited in the case of a sale? Rabba and Rav Yosef both say: The halakha is that the obligation to pay a rental fee is incurred only at the end of the rental period, and therefore, in this case, since its time to be claimed had not yet arrived at the beginning of the rental, the early payment is not considered payment for waiting. Rather, the opposite is the case: This higher price is the value it is worth, and that which he says to him: If you give me payment now it is yours for ten sela a year, is a discount that he offers him for the early payment, and therefore it is not interest.

住讬驻讗 讻讬讜谉 讚讝讘讬谞讬 谞讬谞讛讜 讜讘注讬 诇诪砖拽诇 讚诪讬 诪注讻砖讬讜 讛诇讻讱 讗讙专 谞讟专 诇讬讛 讛讜讗 讜讗住讜专 讗诪专 专讘讗 讚拽讜 讘讛 专讘谞谉 讘讛讗 诪讬诇转讗 讜讗讜拽诪讜讛 讗拽专讗 讻砖讻讬专 砖谞讛 讘砖谞讛 砖讻讬专讜转 砖诇 砖谞讛 讝讜 讗讬谞讛 诪砖转诇诪转 讗诇讗 讘砖谞讛 讗讞专转

By contrast, in the latter clause, since it is a sale, and the owner of the field wants to take the money from now, if he agrees to a later payment at a higher price, this is therefore considered payment for waiting, and it is forbidden. Rava said: The Sages examined this matter closely and established that this halakha is derived from the verse that states: 鈥淟ike a hired laborer, year by year鈥 (Leviticus 25:53). It is derived from this verse that the obligation to pay the rental fee of this year is incurred only in the following year.

讜讗诐 诇讙讜专谉 讘砖谞讬诐 注砖专 诪谞讛 讗住讜专 讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讟专砖讗 砖专讬

搂 The mishna teaches: If the field owner said: But if you wait and pay me at the time of the harvest, the field is yours for twelve hundred dinars, this is prohibited. Rav Na岣an said: Tacit interest [tarsha] is permitted. In other words, one may make a contract for a sale with a later payment date at an increased price, as long as he does not specify that the higher price is due to the delay but merely states a price and a date.

讗讬转讬讘讬讛 专诪讬 讘专 讞诪讗 诇专讘 谞讞诪谉 讜讗诪专讬 诇讛 专讘 注讜拽讘讗 讘专 讞诪讗 诇专讘 谞讞诪谉 讜讗诐 诇讙讜专谉 讘砖谞讬诐 注砖专 诪谞讛 讗住讜专 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛转诐 拽抓 诇讬讛 讛讻讗 诇讗 拽抓 诇讬讛

Rami bar 岣ma raised an objection to Rav Na岣an, and some say it was Rav Ukva bar 岣ma who raised the objection to Rav Na岣an: The mishna states: But if you wait and pay me at the time of the harvest, the field is yours for twelve hundred dinars, this is prohibited. Rav Na岣an said to him: There is a difference between the two cases. There, in the case of the mishna, he fixed the price for him as interest, as he explicitly stated that there was an additional cost for a later payment, whereas here, in the case concerning which I stated my ruling, he did not fix it for him as interest, but merely quoted a higher price.

讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 讟专砖讗 讚讬讚讬 砖专讬 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 砖讻专讗讬 诇讗 驻住讬讚 讝讜讝讬 诇讗 爪专讬讻谞讗 讗谞讗 讛讜讗 讚拽讗 注讘讬讚谞讗 诪讬诇转讗 讙讘讬 诇讜拽讞

Rav Pappa said: My tacit interest arrangement that I offer customers, where I sell my liquor at the times when the market price is low and agree to have the buyer pay me for it later on when the market price is higher, is permitted. What is the reason for this? My liquor would not be lost were I to store it for a while, and I do not need money at the present time. I could therefore simply hold it to sell at a higher price later. I sell it early because it is I who am performing a beneficial matter for the customer, by selling it to him earlier without demanding immediate payment, and this is not interest.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 砖砖转 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 讗讬讚讬 诇专讘 驻驻讗 诪讗讬 讞讝讬 诪专 讚拽讗 讗讝诇转 讘转专 讚讬讚讱 讝讬诇 讘转专 讚讬讚讛讜 讚讗讬诇讜 讛讜讜 诇讛讜 讝讜讝讬 讛讜讜 砖拽诇讬 讻讬 讛砖转讗 讛砖转讗 讚诇讬转 诇讛讜 讝讜讝讬 砖拽诇讬 讻讬讜拽专讗 讚诇拽诪讬讛

Rav Sheshet, son of Rav Idi, said to Rav Pappa: What does the Master see to indicate that you should follow yourself, i.e., consider this matter from your perspective, and therefore conclude that it is permitted because you are not earning interest? You could equally follow their side, and consider the matter from the perspective of your customers, as, if they had money available they would buy liquor at the current price, but now that they have no money available they buy it in accordance with the future, more expensive rate. Consequently, they are actually paying interest in exchange for the delay in payment. Rav Pappa did not respond.

讗诪专 专讘 讞诪讗 讟专砖讗 讚讬讚讬 讜讚讗讬 砖专讬

Rav 岣ma said: My tacit interest arrangement is certainly permitted. He would contract to sell merchandise in a location where its price was low while setting the price according to the more expensive rate in effect in a different location. Those who would purchase the merchandise from him would then take the merchandise to the other location to sell at the highest price, while Rav 岣ma would accept upon himself a certain measure of responsibility for the risks incurred during transport. This deal is considered a sales partnership, not interest.

诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 谞讬讞讗 诇讛讜 讚诇讬拽讜 讘专砖讜转讬 讚讻诇 讛讬讻讗 讚拽讗 讗讝诇讬 砖讘拽讬 诇讛讜 诪讻住讗 讜谞拽讜讟 诇讛讜 砖讜拽讗

What is the reason for this? Rav 岣ma said: It is convenient for them that the merchandise remains established in my domain, as anywhere that they go, the authorities leave them alone with regard to taxes and other people maintain the market for these sellers. The merchants selling Rav 岣ma鈥檚 wares received preferential treatment, as Rav 岣ma was a scholar from the house of the Exilarch, whose members would receive assistance from all. The higher price they paid was in consideration for these advantages; it was not payment for waiting.

讜讛诇讻转讗 讻专讘 讞诪讗 讜讛诇讻转讗 讻专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讜讛诇讻转讗 讻专讘讬 讬谞讗讬 讚讗诪专 诪讛 诇讬 讛谉 讜诪讛 诇讬 讚诪讬讛谉

The Gemara summarizes the rulings in a number of the cases discussed above: And the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rav 岣ma, that his type of tacit interest agreement is permitted. And the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, that fixed interest can be reclaimed in court. And the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yannai, who says: What difference is it to me if he referred to the produce, and what difference is it to me if he referred to the produce鈥檚 value? In other words, if one gave an item or money to another as payment of his loan, this is considered a sale without interest.

诪转谞讬壮 诪讻专 诇讜 讗转 讛砖讚讛 讜谞转谉 诇讜 诪拽爪转 讚诪讬诐 讜讗诪专 诇讜 讗讬诪转讬 砖转专爪讛 讛讘讗 诪注讜转 讜讟讜诇 讗转 砖诇讱 讗住讜专 讛诇讜讛讜 注诇 砖讚讛讜 讜讗诪专 诇讜 讗诐 讗讬 讗转讛 谞讜转谉 诇讬 诪讻讗谉 讜注讚 砖诇砖 砖谞讬诐 讛专讬 讛讬讗 砖诇讬 讛专讬 讛讬讗 砖诇讜 讜讻讱 讛讬讛 讘讬转讜住 讘谉 讝讜谞讬谉 注讜砖讛 注诇 驻讬 讞讻诪讬诐

MISHNA: If one sold another a field and the buyer gave him some of the money, and the seller said to him: Whenever you wish, bring the outstanding money and take your field at that point, this is prohibited. If one lent money to another on the basis of the borrower鈥檚 field serving as a guarantee, and said to him: If you do not give me the money now and instead delay your payment from now until three years have passed, the field is mine, then after three years, the field is his. This is permitted even if the field is worth more than the amount of the loan. And this is what Baitos ben Zunin would do, with the consent of the Sages, when he lent money.

讙诪壮 诪讬 讗讜讻诇 驻讬专讜转 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗诪专 诪讜讻专 讗讜讻诇 驻讬专讜转 专讘 注谞谉 讗诪专 诪砖诇砖讬谉 讗转 讛驻讬专讜转 讜诇讗 驻诇讬讙讬 讛讗 讚讗诪专 诇讻讬 诪讬讬转讬转 拽谞讬 讛讗 讚讗诪专 诇讻讬 诪讬讬转讬转 拽谞讬 诪注讻砖讬讜

GEMARA: The ruling of the mishna is unclear, as it requires clarification: In a sale such as this, when the buyer has made only a partial payment, who enjoys the profits of this field in the interim period, until the entire transaction is complete? Rav Huna says: The seller enjoys the profits until he receives the full payment, while Rav Anan says: In the meantime they deposit the profits in escrow with a third party until the transaction is finalized. The Gemara comments: And Rav Huna and Rav Anan do not disagree. This one is referring to a case where the seller says: When you bring all the money you will acquire the field, whereas that one is referring to a case where he says at the time of the transaction: When you bring all the money you will acquire it from now.

转谞讬 专讘 住驻专讗 讘专讘讬转 讚讘讬 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 驻注诪讬诐 砖砖谞讬讛诐 诪讜转专讬谉 驻注诪讬诐 砖砖谞讬讛诐 讗住讜专讬谉 讜驻注诪讬诐 砖讛诪讜讻专 诪讜转专 讜诇讜拽讞 讗住讜专 讜驻注诪讬诐 砖讛诇讜拽讞 诪讜转专 讜诪讜讻专 讗住讜专

The Gemara relates: Rav Safra taught the following halakhot of interest as a baraita of the school of Rabbi 岣yya: Sometimes they are both permitted to enjoy the profits of the field, as this does not constitute interest at all; sometimes they are both prohibited from doing so. And sometimes it is permitted for the seller to enjoy the profits of the field but it is prohibited for the buyer to do so; and sometimes it is permitted for the buyer to enjoy the profits of the field and it is prohibited for the seller to do so.

注谞讬 专讘讗 讘转专讬讛 驻注诪讬诐 砖砖谞讬讛诐 诪讜转专讬谉 讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 拽谞讬 讻砖讬注讜专 讝讜讝讱 驻注诪讬诐 砖砖谞讬讛诐 讗住讜专讬谉 讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 诇讻讬 诪讬讬转讬转 拽谞讬 诪注讻砖讬讜

When Rav Safra taught this baraita, Rava answered after him, in explanation: Sometimes they are both permitted to benefit from the field. For example, if the seller said to him: Acquire the field for yourself in accordance with the measure of your money, he effectively acquires the field incrementally in small portions, which is certainly permitted. Sometimes they are both prohibited from benefiting from the field. For example, if the seller said to him: When you bring the money you will acquire it all from now, if the seller enjoys the profits until the remainder of the money is paid, he has clearly taken interest. If the buyer does not make the final payment, the field will remain the property of the seller and his partial payment will be returned, and the field will be considered a loan given to the seller. If the buyer enjoys the profits of the field in the interim, he will have taken interest.

驻注诪讬诐 诪讜讻专 诪讜转专 讜诇讜拽讞 讗住讜专 讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 诇讻讬 诪讬讬转讬转 拽谞讬 驻注诪讬诐 砖讛诇讜拽讞 诪讜转专 讜诪讜讻专 讗住讜专 讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 拽谞讬 诪注讻砖讬讜 讜讝讜讝讗讬 诇讛讜讜 讛诇讜讗讛 讙讘讱

Rava continues: Sometimes the seller is permitted to benefit from the field and the buyer is prohibited from benefiting from it, i.e., the transaction is considered interest from the perspective of the buyer but not the seller. For example, if the seller said to him: When you bring the money you will acquire the field. And sometimes the buyer is permitted to benefit from the field and the seller is prohibited from benefiting from it. For example, if the seller said to him: Acquire it from now, and the money you still owe me will be considered a loan in your possession. In this case, if the seller enjoys the profits he benefits from the extended payment of the loan.

诪讗谉 转谞讗 砖谞讬讛诐 讗住讜专讬谉 讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 讬讛讜砖注 讚诇讗 讻专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讚讗讬 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讛讗诪专 爪讚 讗讞讚 讘专讘讬转 诪讜转专

The Gemara poses a question: Who is the tanna who taught that they are both prohibited from benefiting from the field if he says: When you bring the money you will acquire it from now? Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, says that the opinion of this tanna is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda. As, if it is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, doesn鈥檛 Rabbi Yehuda say that uncertain interest is permitted? In this case as well, it is uncertain whether the arrangement will result in the payment of interest, as it depends on whether or not the rest of the payment is given.

诪砖讻谉 诇讜 讘讬转 诪砖讻谉 诇讜 砖讚讛 讜讗诪专 诇讜 诇讻砖转专爪讛 诇诪讜讻专诐 诇讗 转诪讻专诐 讗诇讗 诇讬 讘讚诪讬诐 讛诇诇讜 讗住讜专 讘砖讜讬讬讛谉 诪讜转专

搂 It is taught in a baraita: If a borrower pledged a house to the lender or pledged a field to him as a guarantee for the loan, and the lender said to the borrower: When you want to sell the house or the field, you must sell them only to me for this specified monetary value, it is prohibited, as the selling of the field for a low price is considered interest paid in exchange for the granting of the loan. But if he said: You must sell them to me according to their value at the time of the sale, this is permitted.

诪讗谉 转谞讗 讘讚诪讬诐 讛诇诇讜 讗住讜专 讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 讬讛讜砖注 讚诇讗 讻专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讚讗讬 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讛讗诪专 爪讚 讗讞讚 讘专讘讬转 诪讜转专

The Gemara asks: Who is the tanna who taught that if he said: You must sell them only to me for this specified monetary value, it is prohibited? Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, said that it is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda. As, if it is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, doesn鈥檛 Rabbi Yehuda say that uncertain interest is permitted? The interest in this case is uncertain, as there is no guarantee that the sale will ever be implemented.

诪讻专 诇讜 讘讬转 诪讻专 诇讜 砖讚讛 讜讗诪专 诇讜 诇讻砖讬讛讬讜 诇讬 诪注讜转 讛讞讝讬专诐 诇讬 讗住讜专 诇讻砖讬讛讬讜 诇讱 诪注讜转 讗讞讝讬专诐 诇讱 诪讜转专 诪讗谉 转谞讗 讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 讬讛讜砖注 讚诇讗 讻专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讚讗讬 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讛讗诪专 爪讚 讗讞讚 讘专讘讬转 诪讜转专

If one sold another a house or sold him a field, and said to the buyer: When I have money, give the property back to me in exchange for the return of the money that you paid for it, it is prohibited, as this transaction is essentially a loan, with the buyer enjoying the profits of the field in the interim. But if the buyer said to him of his own accord: When you have money I will return the property to you, this is permitted. The Gemara again asks: Who is the tanna who taught this ruling? Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, said that it is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda. As, if it is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, doesn鈥檛 Rabbi Yehuda say that uncertain interest is permitted?

诪讗讬 砖谞讗 专讬砖讗 讜诪讗讬 砖谞讗 住讬驻讗 讗诪专 专讘讗 专讬砖讗 讚诇讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪讚注转讬讛 住讬驻讗 讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪讚注转讬讛

The Gemara asks: What is different in the first clause and what is different in the latter clause? Why does it matter who stated the condition? Rava says: The first clause is referring to a situation where the seller did not tell the buyer that the decision to return the field will be of the buyer鈥檚 own accord, but made it a condition of the sale. Consequently, the seller always retains the option to return the money and recover his field, which means it was essentially a loan with the temporary use of the field serving as a substitute for interest. Conversely, in the latter clause, it is referring to a situation where the buyer said he would return the field of his own accord. Since the buyer can choose to keep the field, it is a proper sale.

讛讛讜讗 讙讘专讗 讚讝讘讬谉 诇讬讛 讗专注讗 诇讞讘专讬讛 砖诇讗 讘讗讞专讬讜转 讞讝讬讬讛 讚讛讜讛 拽讗 注爪讬讘 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗诪讗讬 注爪讬讘转 讗讬 讟专驻讜 诇讛 诪讬谞讱 诪讙讘讬谞讗 诇讱 砖讜驻专讗 砖讘讞讗 讜驻讬专讬

搂 The Gemara relates: There was a certain man who sold land to another without a guarantee that if the field is repossessed, the seller will compensate the buyer for his loss. He observed that the buyer was distressed, as he was concerned that the field might have been designated as a pledge to a creditor and would be taken from him, which would cause him to lose his investment. The seller said to the buyer: Why are you distressed? If the creditor seizes the field from you, I will pay you from my best-quality land, and I will also provide compensation for your investment in the improvement of the field, and in addition, I will give you the value of any produce taken from you.

讗诪专 讗诪讬诪专

Later, the legal status of this promise was called into question. Ameimar said:

Scroll To Top