Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) RETURNING PRODUCE IN PLACE OF MONEY

(a) Answer #3 (Rava): The Mishnah is as R. Oshiya.

1. (R. Oshiya - Beraisa): Yehudah told Levi 'Give me the Maneh you owe me so I can buy wheat'; Levi answered 'I have wheat - I will give you a Maneh's worth of my wheat at today's price'. The price of wheat rose; Yehudah asked for the wheat in order to buy wine.
2. Levi: 'I have wine - I will give you wine equal in value to your wheat at today's price'. The price of wine rose; Yehudah asked for the wine in order to buy oil.
3. Levi: 'I have oil - I will give you oil equal in value to your wine at today's price'. In all these cases, it is permitted if Levi has the produce.

i. When the Mishnah says 'he bought' - it means, with the loan.

(b) (Rava): We learn three things from R. Oshiya:

1. It is permitted to convert a loan into produce (if the borrower has produce) - unlike the Beraisa Rabah brought (62B);
2. It is permitted only if the borrower has the produce;
3. R. Yanai, who says that the produce is as the money, is correct.

(c) (Rav): Amanah of produce (Reuven pays Shimon for produce (at today's price), which Shimon will give later when the price will be higher) is permitted;

1. Amanah of money (Reuven pays Shimon for produce (at today's price); later, when the price will be higher, Shimon will pay Reuven the value of the produce) is forbidden (since he gives and receives money, it looks like usury).

(d) (R. Yanai): Getting back their value (in money) is as getting back the produce - both are permitted.
(e) Question (against Rav - Beraisa): It is permitted (to receive back money) if Levi has the produce.
(f) Answer #1 (Rav): The case is, he did Meshichah on the produce (at the beginning - therefore, it was no longer like a loan).
(g) Objection: If so, obviously it is permitted!
(h) Answer #2: Rather, the case is, he designated a corner of the produce that will be Yehudah's.
(i) Answer #3 (Shmuel): The Beraisa is R. Yehudah, who permits one-sided usury (a deal which will either end up as a sale or as a loan)..

1. (Beraisa): Reuven owed Shimon 100; he said that if he does not pay by a certain date, Shimon will get his field. This is only permitted if Reuven eats the produce in the interim (lest he will pay, and it was always a loan, and Shimon's eating was usury);
2. R. Yehudah permits even if Shimon eats the produce in the interim.
3. R. Yehudah: There was a case in which R. Elazar ben Azaryah authorized the buyer to eat the produce!
4. Chachamim: No, the seller ate.

(j) Question: On what do they argue?
(k) Answer #1 (Abaye): One-sided usury.
(l) Answer #2 (Rava): They argue whether one may take usury on condition to return it.

2) CONTRACTING TO SUPPLY PRODUCE

(a) (Rava): Since R. Yanai says that money is as the produce, we may say that produce is as money, and we may contract to supply produce for a set price even if the seller has no produce (as long as there is a set price in the market).
(b) Question (Rav Papa - Beraisa): It is permitted only if Levi has the produce.
(c) Answer (Rava): That refers to a loan; my law refers to a sale.
(d) (Rabah and Rav Yosef): The reason Reuven may contract to supply produce even if Reuven has no produce is because Reuven does not give anything extra to the buyer - had the buyer kept his money, he could have bought produce cheaply elsewhere.
(e) Question (Abaye): If so, a loan of a Se'ah on condition to return a Se'ah should be permitted, for the borrower does not give anything extra to the lender - it would not have spoiled!
(f) Answer (Rav Yosef): A loan is forbidden, we permitted a sale.
(g) Question (Rav Ada bar Aba): But the buyer saves the fee he would have had to pay someone to go to buy where the produce is cheap!
(h) Answer #1 (Rava): Indeed, it is only permitted when the buyer pays that to the seller.
(i) Answer #2 (Rav Ashi): (The sellers pay) the donkey-drivers to seek the buyers.
(j) (Rabah and Rav Yosef): Reuven gave money based on the (low) price of the first grain to reach the market - he must see the seller thresh in the granary.
(k) Question: Why is this?

1. If to acquire it - seeing is not an acquisition!
2. If so the seller will be cursed (He who punished...) if he retracts - even if he does not go to see!

(l) Answer: Really, it is so the seller will be cursed (if he retracts);

1. Buyers often give money to more than one seller based on the price of the first grain - if he does not come to the granary, the seller assumes that the buyer preferred someone else's produce.
2. (Rav Ashi): Since this is the reason, the same applies if they met in the market and the buyer said that he expects to receive the produce.

(a) (Rav Nachman): The general rule of usury: any payment for allowing one to borrow money for a period of time is forbidden.
(b) (Rav Nachman): Wax was selling for 4 cakes per Zuz; one seller offered 5 if the buyer would pay now and receive the wax later - this is permitted only if he has wax now.
(c) Objection: This is obvious!
(d) Answer: The case is, the seller himself had already given someone else money to receive wax. One might have thought, this is as someone who borrows a Se'ah on condition to return a Se'ah which he already has at home;

1. Rav Nachman teaches, this is not so - since he has not collected his wax, it is as if he does not have it.