Bava Metzia 75a — the Talmud in English

“Lend me a kor of wheat”

and the market price has not been established,

“and he fixes monetary value for him,”

the lender fixes that the borrower will repay him money, according to the price now, so if

the wheat became cheaper,

wheat,

he gives him

the borrower a kor

of wheat,

and if

the wheat became more expensive,

wheat,

he gives

the borrower

its monetary value,

the value of a kor of wheat, according to what it was worth at the time of the loan.

The Gemara asks:

“But he fixed [the monetary value]!”

For the lender fixed that the borrower should repay money, and if so, even when it became cheaper, the borrower should repay him its value as at the time of the loan, for this is like one who lent money, who takes money according to what he lent. And why did we learn in the beraita that the borrower gives him wheat [since it became cheaper]? But it turns out that the lender loses, for he takes less than what he lent!

He said:

he answered,

Rav Sheshet:

the beraita teaches us two laws: a. If he fixed [the monetary value], whether it became cheaper or whether it became more expensive, he pays money according to what he fixed. b. If he did not fix [that is, he lent him a kor of wheat on condition that he repay him a kor of wheat, and since the market price had not been established, this is a loan of a se'a for a se'a, which is prohibited], then if

it became cheaper, he takes

the lender

his wheat,

a kor of wheat as he lent him [which is now, after it became cheaper, worth less than it was worth at the time of the loan].

And if

it became more expensive, he gives

the borrower to him

its monetary value.

And he is prohibited from taking a kor of wheat, for this is interest, because a kor of wheat is now worth more than it was worth at the time of the loan.

Mishna:

A se'a for a se'a may not be borrowed if the borrower does not have wheat, and the market price has not been established.

Therefore,

a person may not say to his fellow, “Lend me a kor of wheat and I will give”

[repay]

“you at the threshing floor”

[at the time of the threshing floor], and the reason is: We are concerned lest it become more expensive at the time of the threshing floor, and it turns out that there is interest here.

But

if the borrower has wheat,

he says to him

[the borrower]:

“Lend me until my son comes,”

or

“until I find the key,”

and even though he cannot give it to him now, he is considered to “have it.” And the reason for the permission is: Since the prohibition of a se'a for a se'a is only rabbinic, they did not decree in a case where he “has it.”

And Hillel

prohibits

lending a se'a for a se'a even when he has it.

And so Hillel would say,

because he heard that the Sages permit a woman to lend a loaf to her neighbor even if she does not have [another loaf] and the market price has not been established, since it is a small matter, he disagreed with them in this law [in addition to his disagreement above concerning the law of a se'a for a se'a]. And therefore he would say:

“A woman may not lend a loaf to her neighbor”

on condition that she return a loaf to her

“until she fixes its monetary value,”

that she fixes for her such-and-such coins according to the current price [as was explained above in the beraita adjacent to this Mishna]. And the reason for the prohibition is:

“lest the wheat become more expensive”

[than it is now]

“and they be found to come to [the status of] interest.”

Gemara:

We learned in the Mishna: If he has it, it is permitted to borrow a se'a for a se'a.

Rav Huna said: “If he has

[the borrower]

a se'a, he borrows

only

a se'a

the borrower has

two se'ot, he borrows

against them

two se'ot.”

And

Rabbi Isaac

disagrees with Rav Huna

and says: “Even if he has

only

a se'a, he may borrow several kor against it.”

And the reason for the permission is that concerning each and every se'a, it is said: Let the se'a that he has be in its place, for his se'a is not acquired by the lender, and the borrower is able to eat it or sell it; and when he borrows each and every se'a, he borrows with permission.

Rabbi Hiyya taught

[in a beraita, and from it there is]

support for Rabbi Isaac,

that is: We learned in the Mishna at the beginning of the chapter: “He said to him, ‘Behold, your wheat is assigned to me for thirty, and behold, you have wine with me for it, but I have no wine,’” and concerning the end of that Mishna Rabbi Hiyya taught:

“And he has no drop of wine”

or

“he has no drop of oil”

[in a case where there was an agreement concerning oil], and the Gemara infers from this:

“But if he has

a drop,

he may borrow several drops against it,”

and this proves like Rabbi Isaac.

We learned in the Mishna:

“And Hillel prohibits”:

Rav Nahman said in the name of Shmuel: “The halakha is in accordance with the words of Hillel.”

The Gemara concludes:

“And the halakha is not in accordance with him,”

Rav Nahman in the name of Shmuel [and the halakha follows the Sages in the Mishna, that it is permitted to lend a se'a for a se'a when he has it].

We learned in the Mishna:

“And so Hillel would say: A woman may not lend”

[and so forth]:

Rav Yehuda said in the name of Shmuel: “These are the words of Hillel, but the Sages

disagree

and say: They borrow

loaves

without specification,

and it is not necessary to make their monetary value [as Hillel does],

and they repay without specification,

and the reason for the permission is that they were not so stringent about examining the prohibition of a se'a for a se'a.

And

further

Rav Yehuda said in the name of Shmuel: “Members of a group

who travel on the road, or sit in a house while each one eats for himself,

who are exacting with one another

who do not waive a small matter, and are exacting to lend to one another by measure, by weight, and by count. When they lend on Shabbatot and Festivals,

they transgress on account of the prohibition of measuring

with an item that is customarily measured,

and on account of

the prohibition of

weighing

with an item that is customarily weighed,

and on account of

the prohibition of

counting

with an item that is customarily counted, for all these are things that it is prohibited to do on Shabbat and Festivals.

And

they likewise transgress

on account of

the prohibition of

borrowing and repaying on a Festival.

That is: We learned in the Mishna [Shabbat 148a]: “A person may ask for vessels of wine, etc., provided that he does not say to him, ‘Lend me,’” for in the wording “Lend me” the Sages prohibited it lest he write. But these members of a group do not want to use the wording of a request, because the wording of a request implies that he must return the very same item that he requested, and they think in their hearts that they will have to return it immediately; and therefore they use the wording of a loan. “ And they repay” means that if he repays on a Festival, he should not use the wording of repayment [which the Sages prohibited lest he write], but rather the wording of return. And these members of a group, because they are exacting, use the wording of repayment.

These group members, because they are exacting, use the wording “repay.”

“And in accordance with the words of Hillel”

[in our Mishna], who said, “A woman may not lend a loaf,” and so forth, the members of a group who are exacting with one another, when they lend to one another, transgress

also on account of

interest.

interest.

And

further

Rav Yehuda said in the name of Shmuel: Torah scholars are permitted to borrow from one another with interest! What is the reason? They know that interest is prohibited

, and it is a gift that they give

[give]

to one another,

from one to the other, and specifically a small matter, where the Torah scholar knows in his heart that even without the loan he would have given it to him; and specifically Torah scholars are permitted to do this, but not other people.

And the Gemara brings that there were amoraim who practiced borrowing from one another at interest, as in the case of

Samuel said to Avuh

bar Ihi: Lend me one hundred peppercorns for one hundred and twenty peppercorns

, and it is proper

and good [and the matter is permitted].

Rav Yehuda said in the name of Rav: It is permitted for a person

to lend

to

his sons,

and

to

the members of his household at interest!

And the reason for the permission is:

in order to make them taste the taste of interest

so that they know how much the one giving it suffers, and understand how great his punishment is, and in the future refrain from the prohibition of interest.

And the Gemara concludes:

But it is not a matter!

It is incorrect and it is forbidden to lend to them! And the reason for the prohibition is:

because they will come to become accustomed

that they will become accustomed to this, and their hearts will covet the profit of interest.

Mishna:

A person may say to his fellow: Weed

pull out the bad grasses from among the good ones

with me

today,

and

I

will weed with you

tomorrow; or:

Dig

plow

with me

today,

and I will dig

with you

tomorrow.

And the novel point in the Mishna is that we do not say: Perhaps the weeding or digging of this day is harder than that of yesterday, and in payment for having waited for his fellow for the wages of his work [of yesterday], his fellow performs harder work with him today .

And he may not say to him: Weed with me

today

and

I

will dig with you

tomorrow, or:

Dig with me

today

and

I

will weed with you

tomorrow. And the reason for the prohibition is that sometimes digging is harder than weeding, and sometimes the reverse; and in payment for his waiting for the wages of his work until that time, he takes upon himself work that is harder than what he did.