Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) THE TIME TO CLAIM ONA'AH

(a) (Mishnah): He can claim until...
(b) (Rav Nachman): This only refers to the buyer - but the seller can always claim.
(c) Support (Mishnah): They reverted to Chachamim's opinion.

1. If the seller can always claim - we understand why they reverted to Chachamim's opinion (R. Tarfon did not give them any more time to claim).
2. But if the buyer and seller have the same time - why did they revert? The extra time R. Tarfon gives (the whole day) also helps them!

(d) Rejection: They reverted because they often overcharged, they rarely undercharged.
(e) Rami bar Chama's host sold wine and was underpaid; he was sad because the time to show it had elapsed. Rami sent him to Rav Nachman, who ruled that the seller can always claim.
(f) Question: What is the reason?
(g) Answer: The buyer holds the item - wherever he goes, he can show it to people who will tell him if he erred;

1. The seller does not hold the item - he will not realize his mistake until another sale of that item arises.

(a) Reuven was selling silk bands. He was asking six, they were worth five. If someone gave him five and a half, he would accept it. Shimon reasoned - if I pay five and a half, I cannot claim the Ona'ah (it will be too little)! He paid six and claimed the Ona'ah
(b) (Rava): One may only claim Ona'ah from a merchant, not from a regular person selling his belongings (because it is known that a person only sells his belongings for more than their value).
(c) A similar case occurred with a man selling noserings; Rav Chisda ruled like Rava; Rav Dimi and R. Elazar approved.
(d) Question (the coming Mishnah): Just as (one can claim) Ona'ah from a commoner, he can claim from a merchant.

1. Suggestion: 'Commoner' refers to a regular person selling his belongings.

(e) Answer (Rav Chisda): The Mishnah speaks of one selling hemp clothing, which is normally sold; but the vessels a person uses are dear to him, he would only sell them for more than their value.

(a) (Mishnah): Buyers and sellers are both forbidden to deceive. Just as Ona'ah applies to a commoner, it applies to a Tagar (professional merchant);
(b) R. Yehudah says, there is no Ona'ah regarding a Tagar.
(c) Whoever was deceived has the upper hand; he can demand the Ona'ah, or void the sale.
(d) (Gemara) Question: What is the source of this?
(e) Answer (Beraisa): "V'chi Timkeru Memkar...Al Tonu" - this would only teach when the buyer was deceived (overpaid);

1. "O Kano...Al Tonu" includes when the seller was underpaid.

(f) The Torah must teach both.

1. If it only commanded the seller - one might have thought, this is because he knows the item well, but the buyer is not so aware, he is not commanded;
2. If it only commanded the buyer - one might have thought, this is because it is advantageous to buy - but selling is disadvantageous, the seller is not commanded.

(g) (Mishnah): R. Yehudah says, there is no Ona'ah regarding a Tagar.
(h) Question: Why should this be?!
(i) Answer #1 (Rav Nachman): R. Yehudah speaks of a Tagar that is constantly buying and selling - he knows the value well, he sometimes undercharges intentionally, when he wants money for a good purchase.
(j) .Answer #2 (Rav Ashi): R. Yehudah means, the law of Ona'ah (i.e. a sixth) does not apply to a Tagar, rather, he can demand compensation for any amount he was underpaid.
(k) Support (for Rav Nachman - Beraisa): Ona'ah does not apply to a Tagar because he knows prices.
(l) (Mishnah): Whoever was deceived has the upper hand; he can demand the Ona'ah, or void the sale.
(m) Question: Our Mishnah is not as R. Noson, nor as R. Yehudah ha'Nasi (in the Beraisa on 50B)!

1. Our Mishnah says that the deceived party has the choice - R. Noson did not say this (rather, more than a sixth, the sale is void; by exactly a sixth, the Ona'ah is returned);
2. Our Mishnah says that even the buyer has the upper hand when deceived - Rebbi only says that the seller has the upper hand!

(n) R. Elazar: I do not know who taught this clause of our Mishnah!
(o) Answer #1 (Rabah): Really, it is R. Noson - the Beraisa should also say that he can choose.
(p) Answer #2 (Rava): Really, it is Rebbi - the Beraisa only mentions what the first Mishnah (which spoke of the buyer claiming Ona'ah) omitted (but he holds that either can claim Ona'ah).
(q) Support (Rav Ashi): Our Mishnah says that the law is the same for the buyer and seller, yet it only illustrates the buyer's claim.

(a) (Rav): Reuven sold to Shimon 'On condition that you have no claim of Ona'ah against me' - Shimon can claim the Ona'ah;
(b) (Shmuel): He cannot claim the Ona'ah.
(c) Rav holds as R. Meir, Shmuel holds as R. Yehudah.

1. (Beraisa - R. Meir): Levi told Leah 'You are Mekudeshes to me on condition that you have no claim on me for clothing, food and relations (at the normal times) - she is Mekudeshes, his condition is void;
2. R. Yehudah says, the condition is valid regarding monetary matters (clothing and food).

(d) Rejection #1: Rav says, even R. Yehudah holds as me - R. Yehudah only said the condition works in a case where she knows what she is losing, she pardons him - in the sale, Shimon does not know that there is Ona'ah, he does not pardon it!

(e) Rejection #2: Shmuel says, even R. Meir holds as me - R. Meir only said the condition is void when it definitely uproots Torah law - in the sale, perhaps there is no Ona'ah (so the condition is valid)!
(f) (Rav Anan citing Shmuel): If he said 'On condition that you have no (claim of) Ona'ah against me' - he cannot claim Ona'ah;

1. If he said 'On condition that there is no Ona'ah' - behold, there is Ona'ah (and he can claim it).

(g) Question (Beraisa): One who buys and sells b'Emanah (Reuven pays Shimon to sell Reuven's goods), and one who says 'On condition that you have no Ona'ah against me' - there is no Ona'ah.

1. Rav said that both Tana'im hold as he does - as whom is the Beraisa?

(h) Answer #1 (Abaye): Indeed, we must say that Rav holds as R. Meir, Shmuel holds as R. Yehudah.
(i) Answer #2 (Rava): We need not say that - rather, the Beraisa is when he explicitly said how much Ona'ah there is (the buyers knows, he pardons it);

1. Rav's law is when he only said 'on condition that...'
2. (Beraisa): (Either side can claim Ona'ah) when no one specified - but if the seller said, 'It is worth 100, I sell it to you for 200, on condition that you have no Ona'ah against me' - he cannot claim Ona'ah;
3. Similarly, if the buyer said, 'It is worth 200, I will buy it for 100, on condition that you have no Ona'ah against me' - he cannot claim Ona'ah.

(j) (Beraisa): One who buys and sells b'Amanah - the owner may not say, 'Buy the good merchandise for yourself at its price (for which you will pay me later), and sell the bad for me' (the loan is compensation for his work - this is usury!);

1. Rather, either Shimon buys both good and bad at its price (and keeps the profits of what he sells);
2. Or, both are b'Emanah, Reuven pays all Shimon's expenditures;

i. He does not pay for his toil, for he already received his full wage.
ii. Question: Where did he receive this?
iii. Answer (Rav Papa): The Beraisa speaks of selling hemp garments, the retailer normally keeps four percent of each sale.