Bava Metzia - Daf 77
- Workers hired to draw water for a field, which became unnecessary or impossible
Rava said that if one hires workers to draw water and irrigate his field, and rain watered the field before they could, פסידא דפועלים – it is the workers’ loss, and they are not paid at all, because they were aware that rain would make the irrigation unnecessary. If, instead, the river overflowed into the field and watered it, פסידא דבעל הבית – it is the employer’s loss, since he knew that the river occasionally waters his field, but the workers did not. He pays them כפועל בטל – like an idle worker. If the river stopped flowing in midday, depriving the workers of the water source, then if this event is abnormal, it is the workers’ loss (for the employer did not anticipate it more than they did), and any unperformed work is not paid. If this was a common occurrence, then if the workers were also local residents, it is still the workers’ loss, since they knew as well as he that it might stop up. If they are not local residents, he must compensate them for the time they were without work.
- Reneging on a land sale after partial payment
The Mishnah on Daf 76a stated: וכל החוזר בו ידו על התחתונה – and anyone who reneges, has the lower hand. A Baraisa explains that it refers to one who sold a field for a thousand zuz, and the buyer paid two hundred zuz, and one party retracted (as explained below). If the seller retracts, the buyer has the upper hand, and can choose to demand his money back, or land equal in value to the amount paid, which must be from עידית – superior land. If the buyer retracts, the seller has the upper hand, and may return the buyer’s money, or give land equal to the amount paid, and may give זיבורית – inferior land. The Gemara wonders why the buyer can demand עידית, when he should be no better than an ordinary creditor, who collects בינונית. Furthermore, he should receive a portion of the very land he purchased!? Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak explains that it means מעידית שבה – from the superior part of the land he purchased. Rav Acha the son of Rav Ikka said he is entitled to the seller’s personal עידית, because one who purchases expensive land likely sold his own land cheaply for the funds. Thus, the seller’s retraction indirectly damages the buyer, entitling him to עידית.
- עייל ונפיק אזוזי
In the above Baraisa, Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: מלמדין אותן שלא יחזרו – we instruct them to ensure that they will not be able to retract, by writing a שטר converting the remaining balance into a debt. This implies that otherwise, the parties can still retract. This contradicts another Baraisa, in which he ruled that a security given for a purchase naturally finalizes the entire purchase, and the unpaid balance is rendered a debt!? The Gemara answers that the first Baraisa, where the parties can retract unless the balance is converted to a loan, is דקא עייל ונפיק אזוזי – where [the seller] is going in and out attempting to obtain the money, indicating his insistence on immediate payment. The second Baraisa’s case is where the seller does not display an urgency for immediate payment, so the sale is finalized with the partial payment. The Gemara relates that a man once sold a donkey, which was paid in full except for a single zuz. The seller was “going in and out” to obtain the final zuz, and Rav Ashi wondered if the above ruling applies even to a single zuz. Rava was quoted as ruling: זוזא כזוזי דמי ולא קני – one zuz is like numerous zuz, and he does not acquire the donkey with the partial payment.
