Bava Batra 104a — the Talmud in English

“Any amount less, he deducts; any amount more, he returns.”

And it is precise: specifically, if he said to him, “a measure by the cord,” he is obligated to return,

but

if he said to him

without specification, it is considered “whether deficient or in excess.”

And we reject this:

“Consider the latter clause: ‘And if he said to him, whether deficient or in excess, even if he reduced a quarter-kav per se’a or added a quarter-kav per se’a, it is settled.’”

And it is precise in the opposite manner: specifically, if he said to him, “whether deficient or in excess,” it is settled,

but without specification, it is considered like a measure by the cord.

Rather,

certainly,

from this nothing can be inferred .

The Gemara further proved:

ta shma,

we learned in a beraita: One who says to his fellow,

“I am selling you a beit kor of earth,”

or

“I am selling you something like a beit kor of earth,”

or

“I am selling you whether deficient or in excess,” even if he reduced a quarter-kav per se’a or added a quarter-kav per se’a, it is settled.

Thus far the beraita.

The Gemara precisely infers:

“Evidently, without specification as well, it is considered like ‘whether deficient or in excess.’”

For three cases were stated in the beraita: “a beit kor,” “something like a beit kor,” and “whether deficient or in excess,” and in all three the law is: “it is settled.”

And we reject this:

There,

the intention of the beraita is not three separate cases, but rather

it is explaining: What is a beit kor that is something like a beit kor [

that is, in what case is he not required to give him an exact beit kor, but only “something like a beit kor”],

such as when he said to him, “whether deficient or in excess.”

However, if he said to him, “an unspecified beit kor,” it is possible to say that he is obligated to give him an exact “beit kor.”

The Gemara raises an objection:

Rav Ashi challenged it: If so, [

if it is as you say, that the intention of the beraita is to explain “what is a beit kor that is something like a beit kor,” and so forth],

why do I need “I am selling you” and “I am selling you”?

That is to say, why did we learn in the beraita, “I am selling you a beit kor of earth,” and “I am selling you something like a beit kor of earth,” implying that each statement is a sale in its own right?

Rather, can one not infer from this:

if he said “a beit kor”

without specification, as well

its law is

like

if he had said

“whether deficient or in excess,” it is considered .

And we conclude: Indeed, so it is—

infer from this.

We learned in the Mishna:

“What does he return to him? Money.

And if he wishes, he returns land to him. And why did they say that he returns money? To improve the position of the seller, for if he left in the field a beit of nine kav … he returns the land to him”

and so forth:

The Gemara raises an objection: Is it only

to improve the position of the seller that we say this,

but

to improve the position of the buyer we do not say this?!

But

indeed

it was taught

in a beraita

, “If he reduced seven and a half kav per kor, or added seven and a half kav per kor,” [

which are a quarter-kav per se’a, as was explained in the Mishna],

“it is settled.”

And if he added

more than this, they compel the seller to sell,

the excess, if the buyer wishes to purchase it ,

and the buyer to purchase

it, if the seller wishes to sell .”

it .”

And it is explained that just as we made an enactment for the seller, so we made an enactment for the buyer, whereas in the Mishna it implies that they instituted only to improve the position of the seller?

And the Gemara answers: Indeed, in truth, we improve the position of the seller and not the position of the buyer. And in any event, we do not compel the seller to sell against his will.

And as for what we said

there

in the beraita, “they compel the seller to sell,” the intention is not that he should sell against his will; rather, it is speaking of a case where the seller wishes to sell, and

for example, it was expensive originally, and it became cheap

now [

the land was expensive at the time of the original sale, and has now become cheaper, when they came to discuss the excess], and the seller wishes to sell the excess at the price of the time when it was expensive.

And in this case they compel him to sell at the time of cheapness,

for we say to him: “If you give land to me, give it at the current cheap price,” [

if you wish to give the buyer land, give it to him according to the current price]. Or take your land and go .

And likewise, if the seller agrees to sell the land at the cheap price, they compel the buyer to purchase it from him. The Gemara raises an objection:

But

indeed

it was taught: “When he gives it to him,” [

when the seller sells the excess to the buyer],

“he gives it to him at the price at which he purchased from him,”

and not at the current cheap price?

And the Gemara answers:

There, for example, it was cheap originally and became expensive now [

the land was cheap at the time of the original sale, and has now become more expensive, when they came to discuss the excess].

And in this case, if the seller comes to compel the buyer to purchase the excess, the buyer can claim: “I do not wish to purchase it at an expensive price; and even at the beginning, when I purchased from you, I purchased only because of the cheap price.”

And in every case where the buyer has a valid claim, we do not compel him to purchase.

But if the seller agrees to sell him the land at the cheap price, they compel the buyer to purchase it from him. For now he has no claim whatsoever.:

We learned in the Mishna: “To improve the position of the seller,

for if he left in the field a beit of nine kav …

he returns the land to him”

and so forth.

Rav Huna said: The nine kav that they stated

with regard to “if he left in the field a beit of nine kav, he returns the land to him,” the law applies not only when he sold him a beit kor,

but even in a large valley

much larger than a beit kor: if he left nine kav, he returns the land to him .

And Rav Nahman said: He gives seven and a half kav [

a quarter-kav for each se’a],

for each and every kor,