(Rava): If three people gave money to Reuven, and each asked him to buy the same thing, and he bought it, they are partners in it;

This is only if they gave him loose money. If the money was bound, he bought for the one whose money he used.

(Rav Papa): Situmta (marking barrels that one wants to buy) is an acquisition.

Question: What does this mean?

Answer #1 (Rav Chaviva): It is a full acquisition.

Answer #2 (Rabanan): If either side retracts, he must receive the curse (He who punished...)

The Halachah follows Rabanan;

In a place where this is used to acquire, it acquires.

(Mishnah): If Reuven harvested...(before there was a fixed price).

(Rav): If two labors still must be done to the Peros, he may contract, but not if three remain.

(Shmuel): If one can do the remaining labors himself, even if 100 remain, he may contract. If something remains to be done at the hands of Heaven, he may not contract.

Question #1 (Mishnah): He may contract if he has a stack of grain.

He must put it in the sun, thresh and winnow!

Answer #1 (for Rav): The case is, it already dried in the sun.

This is still difficult for Shmuel. Winnowing requires wind!

Answer #2 (for Shmuel): He can use a sifter in place of winnowing.

Question #2 (Mishnah): He may contract if he has a container of grapes.

They must be warmed (through the sun, or from the ground), brought to the winery, stomped, and the wine must be drawn into the pit!

Answer #1 (for Shmuel): R. Chiya taught (below) that the olives were already warm. Similarly, we can say that the grapes are already warm.

This is still difficult for Rav, for three labors remain!

Answer #2 (for Rav): The Mishnah discusses a place where the buyer draws the wine into the pit.

Question #3 (Mishnah): He may contract if he has a container of olives.

They must be warmed, brought to the olive-press, pressed, and the oil must be drawn into the pit!

Answer #1 (for Shmuel - R. Chiya): The case is, the olives were already warm.

This is still difficult for Rav, for three labors remain!

Answer #2 (for Rav): The Mishnah discusses a place where the buyer draws the oil into the pit.

Question #3 (Mishnah): He may contract if he has clay formed to make pots.

It must be wrapped, dried, brought to the furnace, baked and taken out!

Answer #1 (for Shmuel): The case is, it is already wrapped and dried.

This is still difficult for Rav, for three labors remain!

Answer #2 (for Rav): The Mishnah discusses a place where the buyer takes the pots out.

Question #4 (Mishnah): He may contract if he has wood and stones that were put in the furnace to make plaster.

They must be burned and taken out, water must be added and it must be mixed!

Answer #1 (for Rav): The Mishnah discusses a place where the buyer mixes it with water.

Question: According to Shmuel, why does the Mishnah say that they were already put in the furnace? Even if they were not, he may contract, since this is not b'Yedei Shamayim!

Answer: The Mishnah means 'once they are ready to put in the furnace.'

(Mishnah): Clay formed to make pots.

(Beraisa - R. Meir): One may not contract until the clay is formed;

R. Yosi says, that is only for white clay. One may contract for pots of black clay, for others have them already formed.

Ameimar would give money once the potter brought (black) clay into his house.

Question: According to whom is this?

According to R. Meir, the clay must be formed!

According to R. Yosi, even if the potter has no clay, he may contract, since others have!

Answer: It is like R. Yosi. In Ameimar's area, clay was expensive. The buyer and seller decide absolutely on the deal only if the potter has the clay.

(Mishnah): One may contract for manure all year round. (R. Yosi permits only if he has a pile; Chachamim permit it.)

Question: What do the first Tana and Chachamim argue about?

Answer (Rava): The first Tana permits even in winter. Chachamim permit only in summer.

(Mishnah): He may contract at the cheap price.

Reuven gave money (for ornaments) to a maker of girls' ornaments, on behalf of his father-in-law. Ornaments became cheaper.

Rav Papa: If you stipulated to receive the cheap price, you get at today's price. If not, you get at the price when the money was given.

Question (Rabanan): If he did not stipulate, why does he get the old price? He only gave money. That is not an acquisition (he can retract and buy now)!

Answer (Rav Papa): I ruled about who must receive the curse 'He who punished...':

If Reuven stipulated and the seller wants to retract, the seller bears the curse. If he did not stipulate and the buyer wants to retract, he bears the curse.

Question (Ravina): What is the source that our Mishnah is Chachamim who argue about R. Shimon, and say that money does not acquire, and even so, if he stipulated, he gets at today's price?

Perhaps our Mishnah is R. Shimon, who says that money acquires. If he stipulated, he gets at today's price. If not, he gets at the original price!

Chachamim would say that either way he gets today's price, for a buyer always intends for the cheaper price!

Answer (Rav Papa): R. Shimon said only that the buyer cannot retract if the price is the same. If it changed, also he may retract.

Support: We must say this. If not, we do not find that a buyer ever bears the curse 'He who punished...' according to R. Shimon!

Question: Perhaps he holds that a buyer never bears the curse!

Rejection (Beraisa - R. Shimon): In any case, that is the law. However, Chachamim said, 'He who punished...'

Question: What does 'in any case' teach?

Answer: It is whether the buyer or seller retracts.

We conclude that R. Shimon said that the buyer cannot retract only if the price is the same.

Question (Rav Acha brei d'Rava): Here, the curse does not apply to the buyer, for Reuven was only a Shali'ach! (He does not retract. His father-in-law cannot be cursed, for he did not appoint a Shali'ach to make a bad deal, i.e. without stipulating!)

Answer (Rav Ashi): He was not a Shali'ach. He received money from his father to buy clothing. (Alternatively, he was buying in order to sell to his father-in-law.)

(Mishnah): One may lend to his sharecropper a Se'ah of wheat (on condition to return a Se'ah) for planting, but not to eat.

R. Gamliel used to lend this way (for planting); whether the price went up or down, he would take back wheat according to the lower price - this was not the law, he was stringent on himself.

(Gemara - Beraisa): A man may lend his sharecropper wheat for (an equal measure of) wheat for planting;

This is only if the sharecropper did not yet start working. If he started, it is forbidden.

Question: Why does the Tana of the Beraisa distinguish between whether he started working or not, but our Tana (of the Mishnah) does not distinguish?

Answer (Rava): In the area of our Tana, the sharecropper provides the seed. Since he has no seed, even if he started working, the owner can fire him;

Therefore, when the owner lends him to seed, it is like hiring him now. He is hired for a smaller wage (i.e. the owner will deduct the amount he gave him from the sharecropper's share of the harvest).

In the area of the Tana of the Beraisa, the owner provides the seed. Since it was a good field, the sharecropper agreed to provide the seed himself. Before he started working, the owner can fire him. Therefore, when the owner lends him seed, it is like hiring him now, for a smaller wage;

The Tana forbids this if he started working and then accepted to provide the seed himself;

Since the owner cannot fire him, he lends to him on condition to get back the same amount. This is forbidden.

(Beraisa): Reuven may ask Shimon to lend to him a Kor of wheat if he fixes a price. If the price declines, he pays wheat. If it goes up, he pays their initial value.

Question: They fixed a price. He should pay what they fixed!

Answer (Rav Sheshes): The Seifa gives the law (he pays wheat or the initial value) if they did not fix a price.