Explanation: He did not [do so] because he intended to detain [paying them]. Rather, he feared lest he not be free to give to them [in time];

[Even if he hired them himself,] he would not transgress even "Bal Teshaheh" since he was engaged in another task.

Question: Did Abaye not know that Rav Sheshes establishes it when he admitted to him and later denied?!

Answer: Abaye holds that we should establish Gezel similar to "Ashak". Just like "v'Chichesh" does not apply to Oshek, it does not apply to Gezel;

Rather, the beginning of Gezel of the verse, and the beginning of Oshek, is denial;

He does not derive like Rav Sheshes below that here it says "Oh b'Gezel", and here it says "Oh Ashak" without a Beis.

Remark: The text does not say "that he already withheld wages."

Explanation: He does not infer because it says Gezel and Ashak, and changed the expression. Rather, it is because two Lavim were written.

Question: Granted, here they were divided to transgress two Lavim. However, regarding Asham Gezeilos, why did the Torah write both, "Oh b'Gezel Oh Ashak"?

Question #1: Why do we need "me'Achicha" to exclude Nochrim? We learn from a Ger Toshav, that only a Ger Toshav (one may not withhold his wages), but not a Nochri!

Question #2: Why did it need to write a Ger Tzedek (convert)? We know from a Ger Toshav, that all the more so a convert (one may not withhold his wages)!

Suggestion: Had the Torah not written Ger Tzedek, we would have established bi'She'arecha for a Ger Tzedek!

Rejection: Bi'She'arecha connotes only a Ger Toshav, who eats Neveilos, similar to "la'Ger Asher bi'She'arecha Titnenah va'Achalah"!

Question: Why do we need to say a Ger Tzedek? We learn from Achicha, for a Ger Tzedek is your brother according to everyone, i.e. R. Yehudah and Rabanan!

They argue in Bava Kama (87a) about "there is no [payment for] embarrassment for slaves, [but they agree that a Ger Tzedek] has brotherhood, and he is your brother in Mitzvos!

Answer #1: Here is different, for it says "me'Achicha", which connotes the choicest among your brothers, like we expound in Bava Kama (88a) "mi'Kerev Achecha."

Answer #2: We expound "me'Achicha", and not all your brothers, like we expound in Kidushin (24b) "Min ha'Of", and not all birds;

We would have excluded a convert, had it not said "Gercha".

Question #1 (Ri): Above (71a), regarding Ribis, we expound "Ger" - this is a Ger Tzedek;

Why do we need this? This is obvious! What is the difference between a Yisrael and a Ger Tzedek? Is a Ger Tzedek not included in Yisrael for all Mitzvos?!

Question #2: Sometimes it says "l'Ezrach vela'Ger", and sometimes it does not say so! What is different [about the places where it says so]? (The Rosh says that it was written for some Drashah.)

Implied question: We should establish it to exclude Chutz la'Aretz!

Answer: It is an obligation on the person, and does not depend on the land.

Implied question: In Kidushin (14b) we did not find a Tana who does not learn [the Gezeirah Shavah] Sachir-Sachir!

Answer: That is regarding an Eved Ivri. [R. Yosi b'Ribi Yehudah] holds that [Sachir] here is not free, and Sachir there is free (so we learn from it).

Implied question: We did not need this Tzerichusa! Had the Torah written only one [exclusion of Nochrim], even regarding "Lo Sigzol", we would have established it for withholding wages, which the verse was discussing, like it says above (61a);

Now that the Torah wrote both, we establish it for Gezel Nochri, through Im Eino Inyan (if it need not teach about itself, we expound a different law from it)!

Answer: Since we find a Tzerichusa, it says that even had [the Torah] explicitly excluded [a Nochri] from Gezel, we would not learn withholding wages from there.

Question: Below in the Beraisa, he expounds several laws from this!

Answer (Tosfos R. Elchanan): Here, he asks what he learns from "Sachir". It should have written 'Lo Talin Pe'ulaso Itcha.'

Implied question: This is [just like] one hired by the hour! (Why must a verse teach this?)

Answer #1 (Ri): It needed to be written. One might have thought that "Sachir" connotes one hired for a day, or half a day. It is common to hire workers only for [at least] a day, or half a day, but not for a tiny amount.

Answer #2: It needs to teach that even if he hired him to harvest one cluster, and [the worker] ate it, even so [the employer] transgresses [if he delays paying him].