Bava Metzia 50b (נ:) — the Talmud in English

But if you say

that

according to the Rabbis, an overcharge of less than a sixth is immediately deemed waived,

and according to Rabbi Tarfon

the equivalent case is an overcharge of less than a third,

which is likewise immediately deemed waived,

then the following difficulty arises:

Why did

the merchants of Lod return to conduct themselves according to the Rabbis, when

they were much better off according to Rabbi Tarfon!

Since

according to the Rabbis, any amount that they designate as an “overcharge,”

from a sixth and more than a sixth up to a third, such that according to their opinion the buyer can retract and demand the return of the amount of the overcharge, whereas

according to Rabbi Tarfon, it is

immediately

deemed waived.

Thus, according to Rabbi Tarfon, they would profit considerably, since they could refrain from raising the price by a full third, and whatever amount they raised the price by less than a third would all be waived for them immediately!?

Rather, it is proved from here that according to the Rabbis an overcharge of less than a sixth is not deemed waived immediately, and similarly, according to Rabbi Tarfon, an overcharge of less than a third is not deemed waived immediately. And since Rabbi Tarfon extended the period during which the waiver does not take effect according to his view until the entire day has passed, the merchants of Lod preferred to return to the words of the Rabbis, because according to their view, once the time sufficient to show the item to a merchant or to his relative has passed, the waiver takes effect, even before the end of the day.

But the Gemara rejects the proof:

Actually, according to the Rabbis an overcharge of less than a third is immediately deemed waived, and there is no proof from the merchants of Lod.

For

do you think

that every

amount less than a third according to Rabbi Tarfon is equivalent to less than a sixth according to the Rabbis,

as you said, so that everything is waived immediately!?

No,

that is not the case!

Rather,

an amount from a sixth up to a third according to Rabbi Tarfon is equivalent to a full sixth according to the Rabbis!

And just as according to the Rabbis a full sixth is not immediately deemed waived with regard to the overcharge, so too, according to Rabbi Tarfon, an overcharge of a sixth and more than a sixth, up to a third, is not immediately deemed waived.

He disagrees with the Sages only with regard to rescission of the sale. For according to his opinion, with an overcharge of a sixth and more than a sixth up to a third, the person who was overcharged has the advantage, whereas according to the Rabbis, when the overcharge is more than a sixth, the sale is void, and both parties may retract.

However, the Gemara challenges this rejection:

If so,

if Rabbi Tarfon disagrees with the Rabbis only regarding rescission of a sale when the overcharge is more than a sixth up to less than a third, but with regard to immediate waiver he holds that an amount greater than a sixth is not immediately waived, and this is not comparable to an amount less than a sixth, which is immediately waived, the following difficulty arises:

Why did

the merchants of Lod

initially

rejoice when Rabbi Tarfon told them that the overcharge is a third and not a sixth? According to Rabbi Tarfon as well, an amount greater than a sixth is not immediately waived; rather, the person who was overcharged may demand the return of the overcharge. What was the great profit for them that caused them to rejoice at his words?

And necessarily, according to your statement,

resolve

the question that the Gemara will raise below: Whether according to the Rabbis, when the overcharge is more than a sixth, the sale is always void, and both parties can always retract from the sale, or whether the ability to retract and rescind the sale exists only until the time sufficient to show the item to a merchant or to his relative has passed.

And according to your statement, it follows that

with regard to rescission of a sale

when the overcharge is more than a sixth,

one may always retract.

For according to this possibility, it is understandable why the merchants of Lod rejoiced initially,

since when Rabbi Tarfon told them that

an amount greater than a sixth

is

only

an overcharge

and not rescission of the sale,

they rejoiced,

because there is a limited period for claiming an overcharge, namely, the time sufficient to show the item to a merchant, whereas rescission of a sale has no limited period, and the person who was overcharged can retract forever. Thus they profited considerably, since the buyer who was overcharged could not retract from the sale after the time sufficient to show the item to a merchant had passed.

But afterward,

when he told them

Rabbi Tarfon that

the entire day

the person who was overcharged may retract, and not only for the time sufficient to show the item to a merchant,

they returned

to the words of the Rabbis. For the profit from Rabbi Tarfon’s words—that the person who was overcharged cannot retract forever, but only until the end of the day—is not a great profit for them, since during the entire day he has ample time to reconsider. Conversely, according to Rabbi Tarfon they lose the return of the overcharge in the case of a full sixth, because according to the Rabbis it can be returned only during the time sufficient to show the item to a merchant, whereas according to Rabbi Tarfon it can be returned throughout the entire day. Therefore, it was preferable for them to return to the words of the Rabbis.

If it would enter your mind

that the second side of the question is correct,

that according to the Rabbis, rescission of a sale

when the overcharge is more than a sixth is only

until the time sufficient to show the item to a merchant or to his relative,

as with an overcharge, the following difficulty arises:

Why did

the merchants of Lod rejoice initially, when Rabbi Tarfon told them that the overcharge is a third and not a sixth?

For according to the Rabbis as well, once the time sufficient to show the item to a merchant has passed, the person who was overcharged can no longer rescind the sale, just as according to Rabbi Tarfon.

And as for waiver of an amount greater than a sixth, it is not immediate even according to Rabbi Tarfon, and the person who was overcharged may demand the return of the amount of the overcharge until the time sufficient to show the item to a merchant. If so, what did the merchants of Lod gain according to Rabbi Tarfon, that they rejoiced at his words!?

Rather, necessarily, resolve from here the question below: According to the Rabbis, when the overcharge is more than a sixth, the sale can be rescinded forever. Therefore, the merchants of Lod rejoiced when Rabbi Tarfon defined an amount greater than a sixth [up to a third] as an overcharge and not as rescission of a sale, since there is a limit to the time for claiming the overcharge.

But the Gemara rejects this: The question below cannot be resolved from here. For even if we say that according to the Rabbis, an amount greater than a sixth constitutes rescission of the sale only until the time sufficient to show the item to a merchant, there would nevertheless be grounds for the merchants of Lod to rejoice at Rabbi Tarfon’s words, and they

rejoiced over a full sixth, since according to Rabbi Tarfon

a full sixth is

deemed waived

immediately, as an amount less than a sixth is according to the Rabbis,

whereas

according to

the Rabbis,

a full sixth is

an overcharge,

and not a waiver.

That is, what we said above—that an amount from a sixth up to a third according to Rabbi Tarfon is equivalent to a full sixth according to the Rabbis—refers to an amount greater than a sixth; a full sixth itself is not included. Rather, according to Rabbi Tarfon it is immediately deemed waived, and the person who was overcharged cannot claim it at all, whereas according to the Rabbis the person who was overcharged can claim it until the time sufficient to show the item to a merchant or to his relative. It was concerning this that they initially rejoiced at Rabbi Tarfon’s words.

And now the Gemara presents the second question:

They raised a question before them: According to the Rabbis, with regard to rescission of a sale

when the overcharge is more than a sixth, is it

possible to retract forever,

meaning that both parties can retract from the sale forever,

or perhaps

rescission of a sale too exists only

until the time sufficient to show the item to a merchant or to his relative?

And if you should say,

if you should say that it is certainly possible to retract forever, because if according to the Rabbis rescission of a sale too exists only

until the time sufficient to show the item to a merchant or to his relative,

the following difficulty arises:

What difference is there between a full sixth and more than a sixth?

You cannot say this, because one can answer that even if we maintain that both in the case of an overcharge of a full sixth and in the case of rescission of a sale, when the amount is greater than a sixth, the period is only until the time sufficient to show the item to a merchant or to his relative, nevertheless

there is

a difference between them:

whereas in the case of a full sixth,

only

the person who was overcharged can retract, whereas when the amount is greater than a sixth, both parties can retract!

Therefore, the Gemara leaves the matter unresolved:

What

is the ruling in this doubt? When the overcharge is more than a sixth according to the Rabbis, can both parties retract forever, or only until the time sufficient to show the item to a merchant or to his relative?

Come and hear

a proof to resolve this question from our Mishna, in which we learned:

The merchants of Lod returned

to conduct themselves

according to the words of the Sages.

And the Gemara proves:

Granted, if you say that according to the Rabbis rescission of a sale is only until the time sufficient to show the item to a merchant or to his relative, whereas according to Rabbi Tarfon it is the entire day; that is why the merchants of Lod returned

to conduct themselves according to the words of the Rabbis, because according to them rescission of the sale lasts only until the time sufficient to show the item to a merchant, whereas according to Rabbi Tarfon the time for claiming the overcharge is the entire day.

But if you say that according to the Rabbis rescission of a sale allows one to retract forever, why did they return

to conduct themselves according to the Rabbis?

For

they were much better off according to Rabbi Tarfon,

and it was more advantageous for them to conduct themselves according to Rabbi Tarfon’s method,

who classified

the price increase that they made from a sixth up to less than a third as

an overcharge,

which the buyer could claim back only during

the entire day, and no longer!

Whereas according to the Rabbis, when the amount is greater than a sixth the sale is void, and both parties can retract forever!

The Gemara rejects the proof: It is still possible to say that according to the Rabbis, rescission of a sale when the amount is greater than a sixth allows one to retract forever, and nevertheless they did not find Rabbi Tarfon’s words preferable, since he held that an amount greater than a sixth is merely an overcharge and that the overcharge can be returned only on that same day, because

rescission of a sale is uncommon!

That is, they have no profit from the fact that according to Rabbi Tarfon, when the amount is greater than a sixth, there is no rescission of the sale, but only a return of the overcharge that day, since rescission of a sale is uncommon. And even when it does occur, the extended time that Rabbi Tarfon grants for returning the overcharge throughout the entire day is sufficient for people who reconsider their decision to retract, and it is equivalent to rescission of the sale forever according to the Rabbis.

Conversely, in the case of a full sixth according to the Rabbis, the overcharge can be returned only during the time sufficient to show the item to a merchant or to his relative, whereas Rabbi Tarfon extends the period for returning an overcharge of a sixth to the entire day. Therefore, it was preferable for them to return to the method of the Rabbis.

Rava said: The halakha is:

if the overcharge was:

Less than a sixth—

the sale is valid

immediately, and there is no claim for an overcharge, because it is deemed waived.

More than a sixth—

the sale is void,

and both parties can retract during the period that will be explained.

A sixth—

the sale is valid,

and neither party can retract from the sale,

but the one who overcharged returns

the

overcharge

to the person whom he overcharged, if the latter claims the overcharge during the period that will be explained.

Both this and that,

both the claim for the return of an overcharge in the case of a sixth and the possibility of rescinding the sale when the amount is greater than a sixth, apply only

until the time sufficient to show the item to a merchant or to his relative.

A beraita was taught in accordance with Rava: In the case of an overcharge—

Less than a sixth—

the sale is valid

immediately, and there is no claim for an overcharge, because it is deemed waived.

More than a sixth—

the sale is void.

A sixth—

the sale is valid, and the overcharge is returned.

These are the words of Rabbi Natan.

Rabbi Judah the Patriarch says: The seller’s hand

who was overcharged

has the advantage.

If he wishes, he says to him, “Give me back my purchase

in return.”

Or

if he wishes, he says to him,

“Give me what you overcharged me.”

Both this and that,

the claim for the return of the overcharge or the possibility of rescinding the sale, apply only

until the time sufficient to show the item to a merchant or to his relative.

We learned in the Mishna:

Until when is it permitted to return

the item? Until the time sufficient to show it to a merchant or to his relative.

Rav Naḥman said: They taught

that he can claim his overcharge only until the time sufficient to show the item to a merchant

only with regard to a buyer

who was overcharged, since the purchase is in his possession and he can show it to another merchant.

But a seller

who was overcharged, since the purchase has already left his possession and he cannot show it to a merchant, and he cannot ascertain that he was overcharged until he sees a similar item being sold at a higher price,

can retract forever.

The Gemara discusses this:

Shall we say that he supports him,

that the tanna of our Mishna supports Rav Naḥman, as we learned:

The merchants of Lod returned

to conduct themselves

according to the words of the Sages.

Granted, if you say

that it is as Rav Naḥman says, namely, that

a seller can retract forever,