Bava Metzia 50a (נ.) — the Talmud in English

A second formulation: if

he sold it to him

an item worth six for five,

then

who was wronged?

Certainly the

seller.

Therefore,

the seller has the upper hand:

If he wishes

to cancel the sale,

he says

to the buyer who wronged him:

Give me my purchase

back!

Or

if the seller wishes to uphold the sale, he says to the buyer who wronged him:

Give me what you wronged me by!

It is evident from the words of this beraita that the law of overcharging applies both when the overcharge is one-sixth of the sale and when it is one-sixth of the money paid. For when the buyer purchases an item worth six for five, this is one-sixth of the sale price, since the coin he did not pay is one-sixth of the item's value. But when the seller sells an item worth five for six, this must be one-sixth of the money paid, since relative to the item's value [which is five], the coin he added to the true value is one-fifth of its value.

The discussion before us is known as the “discussion of the merchants of Lod,” in which the Gemara addresses two fundamental questions:

We learned in the Mishna and in a beraita that if the measure of the overcharge was one-sixth, the one who was wronged may retract from the sale or demand the return of the overcharge, and all this until he shows the item to a merchant or to his relative. But they did not clarify what the law is concerning waiver when the overcharge is less than one-sixth: Is the waiver immediate, or does it take effect only after the amount of time necessary for him to show it to a merchant or to his relative has elapsed?

Likewise, they did not clarify what the law is concerning cancellation of the sale when the overcharge is more than one-sixth: May the one who was wronged cancel it whenever he wishes, indefinitely, or does he have the right to cancel it only until the amount of time necessary for him to show it to a merchant or to his relative has elapsed?

The Gemara now addresses these two questions:

The first question:

They raised a dilemma before them: In the case of less than one-sixth, according to the Rabbis,

is it

an immediate waiver, or

is it not a waiver unless the amount of time has elapsed

necessary for him to show it to a merchant or to his relative.

And if you say,

that is, if you were to say that it is certainly an immediate waiver, because you would find it difficult to accept the possibility that there is no waiver unless the amount of time has elapsed

necessary for him to show it to a merchant or to his relative,

then

what difference is there,

what distinction is there,

between one-sixth and less than one-sixth,

for in both cases, before the amount of time necessary for him to show it to a merchant or to his relative has elapsed, there is no waiver, whereas after that amount of time has elapsed, there is a waiver?!

You cannot say this, for it can be answered:

There is

a difference between them,

as

in the case of

one-sixth, the wronged party’s hand

is

uppermost

in an absolute sense, as he can even demand cancellation of the sale, for so we learned in a beraita:

If he wishes, he retracts

completely from the sale;

if he wishes, he keeps

the purchase

and the one who wronged him returns

the

overcharge to him.

Whereas

in the case of

less than one-sixth,

the one who was wronged cannot retract completely from the sale, but only

keeps the purchase, and the one who wronged him returns

the

overcharge to him.

Therefore, the dilemma is:

what

is the ruling with regard to this dilemma?

Come and hear

a proof from our Mishna, to resolve the dilemma:

For we learned at its conclusion:

The merchants of Lod retracted

from the position of

the Rabbis,

as they preferred their position: that the measure of overcharging is one-sixth, but the one who was wronged may retract only until he shows the item to a merchant or to his relative, rather than following Rabbi Meir, who maintains that the measure of overcharging extends to one-third, but that the one who was wronged may retract throughout the entire day.

They assumed

that the scholars who came to resolve the dilemma from here assumed that the law of

less than one-third according to Rabbi Tarfon

is

the same as the law of

less than one-sixth according to the Rabbis,

that it is comparable.

Now,

if you grant

the one side of the dilemma, namely, that

less than one-sixth according to the Rabbis

is not waived immediately, but only after the amount of time has elapsed

necessary for him to show it to a merchant or to his relative, and

similarly,

according to Rabbi Tarfon, throughout the entire day

there is no waiver for less than one-third, but he may demand the return of the overcharge for less than one-third throughout the entire day,

that is why the merchants of Lod retracted

from following Rabbi Tarfon and adopted the position of the Rabbis.

Initially, when Rabbi Tarfon told them that the measure of overcharging is one-third rather than one-sixth, the merchants of Lod rejoiced, because according to Rabbi Tarfon they gained all the overcharge between one-sixth and more than one-sixth, up to one-third. For according to the Rabbis, in the case of one-sixth the overcharge must be returned, and when it is more than one-sixth the one who was wronged may retract from the sale, whereas according to Rabbi Tarfon he cannot retract, [but he keeps the purchase and the overcharge is returned, until the amount of time necessary for him to show it to a merchant or to his relative [as is the case according to the Rabbis with less than one-sixth].

But when Rabbi Tarfon added that he may retract throughout the entire day and demand payment of his overcharge, from a single peruta up to one-third, it became clear to them that according to his opinion they lost more than they did according to the Rabbis.

For according to the Rabbis, the overcharge of one-sixth and less than one-sixth, after the amount of time necessary for him to show it to a merchant or to his relative has elapsed, is a complete waiver. Whereas according to Rabbi Tarfon, the one who was wronged may continue to demand payment of this overcharge throughout the entire day.