Bava Metzia Chart #13
Chart for Bava Metzia Daf 50a-b
KEY TO DIAGRAM OF SUGYA OF "TAGREI D'LUD" (1)
| DIAGRAM | WHEN IS IT "MECHILAH" (The buyer can no longer get a refund) |
WHEN IS IT "BITUL MEKACH" (The sale is cancelled) |
TO WHAT IS THIS DIAGRAM REFERRING, & ACCORDING TO WHOM |
| #1 | --- | --- | This is the opinion of the Rabanan who argue with Rebbi Tarfon |
| #2 (2) | "Kedei she'Yar'eh" | Forever | Rashi and Tosfos: This is the Havah Amina of the Gemara's first question Tosfos: This is the Maskanah of the Gemara's second question |
| #3 (3) | Immediately | Forever | Rashi: "Mi Savart" of the first question, and Maskanah of the second question |
| #4 (4) | Immediately | Forever | Tosfos: "Mi Savart" of the first question |
| #5 (5) | Immediately | "Kedei she'Yar'eh" | Rashi and Tosfos: Maskanah of the first question Rashi: Havah Amina of the second question |
| #6 (6) | "Kedei she'Yar'eh" | "Kedei she'Yar'eh" | Tosfos: Havah Amina of the second question |
Chart for Bava Metzia Daf 49b-50b
WHAT IS THE LAW OF "ONA'AH?" (7)
| (A) THE BUYER CLAIMED THE OVERPAYMENT WITHIN "AD KEDEI SHE'YAR'EH" |
(B) THE BUYER CLAIMED THE OVERPAYMENT AFTER "AD KEDEI SHE'YAR'EH" (8) |
||
| 1 | HE WAS OVERCHARGED LESS THAN 1/6 | Safek Mechilah (9) | Mechilah (10) |
| 2 | HE WAS OVERCHARGED EXACTLY 1/6 | Ona'ah (11) | Mechilah (10) |
| 3 | HE WAS OVERCHARGED MORE THAN 1/6 | Bitul Mekach (12) | Safek Bitul Mekach (13) |
==========
FOOTNOTES:
==========
(1) See accompanying graphic diagram.
(2) ORIGINALLY, the merchants of Lud rejoiced, because the buyers who were overcharged were unable to cancel the sale (even if they realized the overcharge within "Kedei she'Yar'eh") until they were overcharged by a third.
IN THE END, the merchants of Lud retracted, because they saw that Rebbi Tarfon gives the buyer an entire day to demand his refund in the case of an overcharge of one sixth and less than one sixth, and it is not Mechilah until after the end of an entire day.
(3) ORIGINALLY, the merchants of Lud rejoiced, because the buyers who were overcharged by more than a sixth, until a third, were unable to demand their refund after "Kedei she'Yar'eh."
IN THE END, the merchants of Lud retracted, because there is not much gain in having the buyer unable to demand a refund after the end of an entire day has passed, and the merchants preferred the opinion of the Rabanan in cases of an overcharge of a sixth itself, because after "Kedei she'Yar'eh" the buyer is unable to demand a refund.
(4) ORIGINALLY, the merchants of Lud rejoiced, for the same reason as above (footnote #3), and in addition because in cases of an overcharge of a sixth, the Mechilah is immediate and the buyer has no recourse.
IN THE END, the merchants of Lud retracted, because there is not much gain in having the buyer unable to demand a refund after the end of an entire day. It is preferable to the merchants that it be considered "Bitul Mekach" in cases of an overcharge of more than a sixth, since that also gives the merchants the option to cancel the sale. (Even though they lose out, by following this opinion, in cases of an overcharge of exactly a sixth, since according to the Rabanan of Rebbi Tarfon the Mechilah is not immediate but only after "Kedei she'Yar'eh," nevertheless since this applies only in an infrequent case (overcharge of exactly a sixth) there is not much gain to them.)
(5) ORIGINALLY, the merchants of Lud rejoiced, because in cases of an overcharge of a sixth, it is Mechilah immediately.
IN THE END, the merchants of Lud retracted, because according to Rebbi Tarfon, in cases of an overcharge of more than a sixth, the buyer is able to demand a refund the entire day according to Rebbi Tarfon, while according to the Rabanan the sale is finalized and it is Mechilah as soon as "Kedei she'Yar'eh" passes.
(6) ORIGINALLY, the merchants of Lud rejoiced, for the same reason as above (footnote #2).
IN THE END, the merchants of Lud retracted, for the same reason as above (footnote #4 -- in fact, that reasoning applies all the more so here, since the merchants gain nothing with Rebbi Tarfon's opinion even in the case of an overcharge of a sixth itself).
(7) These laws apply both to a buyer who was overcharged, and a seller who was underpaid. However, with regard to a seller who was underpaid, there is no limit to when he may make his claim (since he is not holding the merchandise such that he can show it to someone to have it appraised), and thus only column (A) applies to a seller.
(8) This applies only to a buyer. A seller, though, may claim an underpayment whenever he notices that he was underpaid, with no time constraint (51a; see previous footnote).
(9) 50a; see next footnote.
(10) That is, the overpayment is not refunded to the buyer because we assume that he acknowledged the overpayment and decided to forego claiming it.
(11) The Tana'im (50b) argue whether one who was defrauded may annul the purchase altogether (Rebbi) or whether the purchase remains valid but the overpayment must be refunded (Rebbi Nasan). (According to Rabah (51a), Rebbi makes a compromise: if the buyer was overcharged, the seller must refund the overpayment but the sale is valid, however if the seller was underpaid, he has the option to receive the balance from the buyer or to annul the sale if he wants.) Everyone agrees, though, that in cases of Ona'ah the one who defrauded does not have the right to cancel the purchase.
(12) That is, the purchase is null and void and either the seller or buyer may choose to cancel the purchase.
(13) 50b; see previous footnote. The Safek is whether it is considered Bitul Mekach, or Mechilah (see footnote #4).