Bava Batra 95a (צה.) — the Talmud in English

And we reject this:

Can it really be compared!?

There,

where he first said to him, “I am selling you a beit kor,” which implies specifically neither less nor more, and only afterward

“whether it is deficient or in excess”

did he say to him;

therefore, what he initially said, “a beit kor,” is also effective in that he relinquishes his claim with regard only to a quarter-kav, because

“a quarter is not considered significant.”

But

more than a quarter,

which is

considered significant,

he relinquishes no claim at all.

Since it is fit to be combined into nine kav,

as it is fit that if many quarters were combined, they would reach the area required for sowing nine kav, which is a significant measure. Therefore,

it becomes

even now

significant land in its own right,

a significant field in and of itself,

and it reverts.

And the buyer must return all the excess beyond a beit kor.

But with regard to a quarter of refuse, where the seller need not specify this condition, but even without specification the buyer waives a quarter of refuse, since it is common for a quarter of refuse to be present, therefore, even when more than a quarter is found, the seller returns only the amount exceeding a quarter, because the buyer waives his claim with regard to the quarter.

Come and hear

from that which was taught in a beraita in tractate Bava Metzia [50b]:

The law of overreaching

in a sale is as follows:

a. If the overcharge in the price was

less than one-sixth

[one-sixth],

the sale is acquired

completely, and the overcharge is not returned, because it is customary for people to waive their claim with regard to it.

b. If it was

more than one-sixth, the sale is void.

c. If it was

is void.

c. If it was

exactly one-sixth, the buyer acquires the item,

and the sale remains valid,

and the one who overcharged

returns the

overcharge.

And the Gemara infers:

Why

when it is exactly one-sixth does he return the entire overcharge?

Let him return

only

up to

the point that there remains

less than one-sixth,

for people waive their claim with regard to less than one-sixth; consequently, the overcharge consists only of the amount that completes it to one-sixth, and he should return only that amount.

Rather,

infer from this: Whenever one is required to return something,

wherever something must be returned,

he returns all of it.

Everything is returned.

This is proof for Rav Huna, that the seller returns all the refuse when it is more than a quarter.

And we reject this:

Can it really be compared!? There, initially he said to him, “equal in value.”

The seller spoke to the buyer on the understanding that he was selling him the item at its true value, and the buyer agreed only on that basis. Therefore, by law, the seller should return even less than one-sixth.

However, less than one-sixth is not recognizable in a vessel,

since the overcharge is not discernible when it is less than one-sixth, and it appears as though this is its true value,

and

therefore

a person waives his claim.

But

one-sixth is recognizable;

the overcharge is discernible,

and a person does not waive his claim

at all, not even with regard to the amount less than one-sixth; therefore he must return everything to him. Likewise,

when it is more than one-sixth, it is a mistaken transaction, and the sale is void

the

sale.

This is unlike the mixture of refuse in produce. Since it is common for a quarter of refuse to be present in a se'a, it is possible to say that the buyer always waives his claim with regard to the quarter, even if more is found there. The seller must return only the amount exceeding a quarter.

Come and hear

from that which was taught in a beraita:

One who accepts a field from another to plant it,

a laborer who accepted a field from its owner, who hired him to plant the entire field with trees,

he accepts upon himself ten barren trees per hundred.

The owner of the field accepts that ten trees out of one hundred will not produce fruit; up to this measure, the laborer is not required to plant other trees in their place, because it is normal for trees to be like this, and the owner waives his claim with regard to it.

And if there were

more than this,

for example, eleven barren trees per hundred,

they impose upon him

upon the laborer

all of it;

he is required to plant new trees in place of all the barren trees, and it is not sufficient for him to plant only one tree in place of the eleventh tree, because the owner does not waive his claim with regard to such a large number of barren trees.

This is proof for Rav Huna, that the seller is required to pay for all the refuse found in the produce.

And we reject this:

Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, said:

With regard to a field,

anything beyond this,

more than ten barren trees per hundred, is considered a complete field in its own right, and with regard to that field

it is like one who has come to plant it initially.

It is as though he had not yet planted anything in it, and only now is beginning to plant it. Therefore, he must plant all eleven trees. This is unlike refuse, where even more than a quarter is not significant in its own right, since it is not discernible to the eye. Therefore, it is possible to say that the buyer waives his claim with regard to the quarter, and the seller must pay him only the amount exceeding a quarter.

We learned in the Mishna: One who sells his fellow

a cellar of wine

accepts ten spoiled barrels per hundred.

And we raised a difficulty with regard to it:

What are the circumstances?

How is this case stated? With what wording did the seller say this to him?

If he said to him “

a cellar of wine”

without specification,

and did not tell him which cellar,

it is difficult.

As will be explained.

If he said to him “

this cellar of wine,”

it is difficult.

As will be explained.

And the Gemara explains the difficulties:

If he said to him “

this cellar,”

it is difficult,

for we learned in a beraita all these possibilities, and in all of them the law differs from that stated in the Mishna.

As it was taught

with regard to one who says to his fellow:

“I am selling you a cellar of wine! He gives him wine that is entirely fine,”

because the unqualified term wine implies good wine.

Whereas our Mishna says that the buyer accepts ten spoiled barrels per hundred!?

And the beraita likewise says: If he said to him:

“I am selling you this cellar of wine! He gives him wine sold in a shop.”

That is, the lowest-quality wine sold in a shop, meaning that even all the barrels may be spoiled. Since “this cellar of wine” implies that he gives it as it is, provided that it bears the designation of wine.

Whereas our Mishna says that the buyer accepts only ten spoiled barrels per hundred!

And the beraita continues: And if he said to him:

“I am selling you this cellar! He has received it, even if it is entirely vinegar.”

Because “this cellar” implies that he gives it as it is, even if it is not wine.

Whereas our Mishna says that everything must be wine.

And we answer:

Actually,

the Mishna is speaking where he said to him:

“An unspecified cellar of wine.”

There is no difficulty from the beraita, since the beraita also agrees with the Mishna,

and it teaches at the beginning of the beraita,

with regard to an unspecified cellar of wine: “

And he accepts ten spoiled barrels per hundred,”

because this is the normal situation, and the buyer waives his claim with regard to it.

And we object:

And

if it is

in “

a cellar of wine”

without specification,

does the buyer accept

ten spoiled barrels per hundred?

But Rabbi Hiyya taught: One who sells a barrel of wine to his fellow gives him wine that is entirely fine,

and the buyer accepts no inferior wine at all.

And we answer:

A barrel is different, because it is all one wine.

It is all a single wine, and it is not relevant for the buyer to accept even part of it as inferior. But when he sells many barrels, the buyer accepts ten spoiled barrels per hundred.

And we object:

But Rav Zevid of the school of Rabbi Oshaya taught: “I am selling you a cellar of wine; he gives him wine that is entirely fine.”

“I am selling you this cellar of wine; he gives him wine that is entirely fine, and he accepts ten spoiled barrels per hundred.”