Obviously, if Reuven was trying to sell land for 100, and was able to sell only a larger land for 200, and he shows anxiety for the money, the buyer does not acquire.

Question: If Reuven was trying to sell land for 100, and had he tried harder, he could have sold it, but instead, he sold a land for 200, and shows anxiety for the money, what is the law?

Is this like one who sells land due to its poor quality?

This question is not resolved.

(Mishnah): If Reuven hired a donkey-driver or wagon-driver (who then retracted) ...he hires others for more or tricks them.

Question: How much more may he pay others at the expense of the retractors?

Answer (Rav Nachman): He may pay up to the wages (of what they already worked).

Question (Rava - Beraisa): He may pay until 40 or 50 Zuz.

Answer (Rav Nachman): That is when the workers left their work Kelim with the employer.

(Mishnah): If Reuven rented Shimon's donkey to use it on the mountain, and he used it in the valley (or vice-versa) for the same distance and it died, he is liable;

If he rented it to use it on the mountain and he used it in the valley and it slipped, he is exempt. If it became overheated, he is liable;

If he rented it to use it in the valley and he used it on the mountain and it slipped, he is liable. If it became overheated, he is exempt;

If it became overheated due to the ascent, he is liable.

If he rented a donkey and it Hivrikah (this will be explained) or was taken for the king's service, Shimon tells him, here is your animal (I need not supply you with another);

If it died or became broken (broke a limb), Shimon must give him another donkey to use.

(Gemara) Question: Why do we distinguish between slipping and overheating in the Seifa, but not in the Reisha?

Answer #1 (d'Vei R. Yanai): In the Reisha it died because it was unaccustomed to the air (whether he switched to the mountain or valley he is liable).

Answer #2 (R. Yosi bar Chanina): In the Reisha it died from exhaustion (Shimon can say, this would not have happened had you taken it in the proper place).

Answer #3 (Rabah): In the Reisha a snake bit it.

Answer #4 (R. Chiya bar Aba): The Mishnah is R. Meir, who says that anyone who transgresses the owner's wishes is a robber.

Question: Where did R. Meir say this?

Answer #1 (Mishnah - R. Meir): If a dyer was told to dye wool red, and he died it black, or vice-versa, he pays the value of the wool he received;

R. Yehudah says, the owner pays the increased value or the dyer's expenses, whichever is smaller.

Rejection: Perhaps R. Meir's reason is that the dyer acquires it through changing it!

Answer #2 (Beraisa): Money collected (to give to the poor for the festive meal on Purim) must be given to the poor for Purim;

Money collected for the poor of a city (Tosfos - for Purim) must be given to the poor of that city (some texts delete this clause). We are not concerned (Rashi - that this is too much for Purim, that some should be given for regular Tzedakah; Ritva - to check that the recipient is truly poor);

We may slaughter calves for the poor to eat on Purim; the extra meat (is sold, the money) goes to Tzedakah.

R. Eliezer says, the poor people must use Purim money for the Purim meal. They may not use it to buy a shoe strap without stipulating in front of the people of the city.

This (Maharsha - the entire Beraisa until now) was said in the name of R. Meir. (Perhaps, since he intends for Tzedakah, the only reason to forbid is because one who deviates is a robber. The Ra'avad in Shitah Mekubetzes says so regarding the next case.)

R. Shimon ben Gamliel is lenient (the money may be used for other things).

Rejection: There, the people gave the money only for the Purim meal. It belongs to the giver until it is used for the meal!

Answer #3 (Beraisa - R. Meir): If an Oni received money to buy a cloak, he may not use it for a different garment, for this deviates from the giver's intent.

Question: Perhaps we are concerned lest the giver announced publicly that he will buy a cloak for the poor man, and they will suspect that he did not keep his promise.

Rejection: If so, why does the Beraisa say 'for this deviates from the giver's intent'? It should say 'due to suspicion'!

Rather, the reason is because one who deviates from the giver's intent is a robber.

(Mishnah): If he rented a donkey and it Hivrikah...

Question: What does Hivrikah mean?

Answer #1 (Chachamim of Bavel): It is a speck in the eye.

Answer #2 (Rava): Worms (Avzakah) corroded its legs.

Some say that once a man was killed for saying that he saw moths in the king's linen garments. Moths eat woolen clothing, not linen.

Some say that he actually said that it was in the woolen clothing, and he was spared.

(Mishnah): If it was taken for the king's service, Shimon tells him, here is your animal.

(Rav): This is only when the king returns the animals after using them. If not, Shimon must supply him with another donkey.

(Shmuel): Whether or not the king returns them, if it was taken in the same direction that Reuven was going, Shimon can say 'here is your animal.' If it was not taken the way Reuven was going, Shimon must supply another.

Question (Beraisa): If he rented a donkey and it Hivrikah or went crazy, Shimon can say 'the animal is in front of you.' If it died or was taken for the king's service, Shimon must supply another.

Suggestion: This is when it was not taken in the direction that Reuven was going.

Rejection (Seifa - R. Shimon ben Elazar): If it was taken in the same direction that Reuven was going, Shimon can say 'the animal is in front of you.' If not, Shimon must supply another.

Inference: The first Tana does not distinguish in which direction it was taken!

Answer #1: Shmuel holds like R. Shimon ben Elazar.

Answer #2: The entire Beraisa is R. Shimon ben Elazar. The Beraisa is abbreviated, it should say as follows:

If Reuven rented a donkey and it Hivrikah or went crazy, Shimon can say 'here is your animal.' If it died or was taken for the king's service, Shimon must supply another;

This is when it was not taken in the same direction that Reuven was going. If it was taken in the same direction, Shimon can say, here is your animal.

This is R. Shimon ben Elazar's opinion, who says that Shimon must supply another if it was taken in a different direction.