## Bava Metzia Daf 47a

###### Bava Metzia 47a:1
[Bava Metzia 47a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/47a:1)

וְיֵשׁ לוֹ עָלָיו אוֹנָאָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** if the sum of money is one-sixth lower than the value of the item, the seller of the item **has** a claim of **exploitation against** the buyer, who must pay the difference to the seller.


###### Bava Metzia 47a:2
[Bava Metzia 47a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/47a:2)

קָנָה – אַף עַל גַּב דְּלָא מָשַׁךְ, דְּכֵיוָן דְּלָא קָפֵיד – קָנָה, דְּכִי חֲלִיפִין דָּמֵי. וְיֵשׁ לוֹ עָלָיו אוֹנָאָה – דִּ״מְכוֹר לִי בְּאֵלּוּ״ קָאָמַר לֵיהּ. רַב אַבָּא אָמַר רַב הוּנָא: ״מְכוֹר לִי בְּאֵלּוּ״ – קָנָה, וְאֵין לוֹ עָלָיו אוֹנָאָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara elaborates: The buyer **acquires** the item **even though he did not pull** it, **because since** the seller **is not particular** about the sum, the buyer **acquired** the item, **as** it is **similar** to a transaction effected by means of **exchange. And** the seller **has** a claim of **exploitation against** the buyer **because** the buyer **said to him: Sell me** your item **for these** coins. The use of the language of sale indicates that it will be for an acceptable price. **Rav Abba** says that **Rav Huna says** that if the buyer said: **Sell me** your item **for these** coins, the buyer **acquired** the item; **and** the seller of the item **has no** claim of **exploitation against** the buyer, as it is a full-fledged transaction effected by means of exchange.


###### Bava Metzia 47a:3
[Bava Metzia 47a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/47a:3)

פְּשִׁיטָא: דָּמִים וְאֵין מַקְפִּיד עֲלֵיהֶן – הָא קָאָמְרִינַן דְּקָנֵי, דְּכַחֲלִיפִין דָּמוּ. חֲלִיפִין וּמַקְפִּיד עֲלֵיהֶן, מַאי?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara analyzes these *halakhot*: It is **obvious** that in a case where there is a sale of an item for **money and** the seller **is not particular about** the sum, **we say that** the buyer **acquires** the item immediately upon receiving the money, **as** it is **similar** to a transaction effected by means of **exchange.** But if it is a transaction effected by means of **exchange and** one of the parties **is particular that** the value of the items is equal, **what** is the *halakha*? Is its legal status that of a sale, or that of a transaction effected by means of exchange?


###### Bava Metzia 47a:4
[Bava Metzia 47a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/47a:4)

אָמַר רַב אַדָּא בַּר אַהֲבָה, תָּא שְׁמַע: הֲרֵי שֶׁהָיָה תּוֹפֵשׂ פָּרָתוֹ וְעוֹמֵד, וּבָא חֲבֵירוֹ וְאָמַר לוֹ: פָּרָתְךָ לָמָּה? לַחֲמוֹר אֲנִי צָרִיךְ. יֵשׁ לִי חֲמוֹר שֶׁאֲנִי נוֹתֵן לְךָ. פָּרָתְךָ בְּכַמָּה? בְּכָךְ וְכָךְ. חֲמוֹרְךָ בְּכַמָּה? בְּכָךְ וְכָךְ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Adda bar Ahava says: Come** and **hear** a resolution to the dilemma from a *baraita*: **There is** a case where one **was grasping his cow and standing** in place, **and another came and said to him: Why** is **your cow** standing here? The owner of the cow replied: **I need a donkey,** and I hope to exchange this cow for one. The other person said: **I have a donkey that I** can **give you; for how much** are you selling **your cow?** The owner of the cow responded: I am selling it **for such and such** a price. He then said: **For how much** are you selling **your donkey?** The owner of the donkey responded: I am selling it **for such and such** a price.


###### Bava Metzia 47a:5
[Bava Metzia 47a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/47a:5)

מָשַׁךְ בַּעַל הַחֲמוֹר אֶת הַפָּרָה, וְלֹא הִסְפִּיק בַּעַל הַפָּרָה לִמְשׁוֹךְ אֶת הַחֲמוֹר עַד שֶׁמֵּת הַחֲמוֹר – לֹא קָנָה בַּעַל הַחֲמוֹר אֶת הַפָּרָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If, after this discussion, **the owner of the donkey pulled the cow, but the owner of the cow did not manage to pull the donkey before the donkey died, the owner of the donkey did not acquire the cow,** even though ostensibly this was a transaction effected by means of exchange, which is typically complete once one of the parties pulls the item he is acquiring.


###### Bava Metzia 47a:6
[Bava Metzia 47a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/47a:6)

שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ: חֲלִיפִין וּמַקְפִּיד עֲלֵיהֶן – לֹא קָנָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **Learn from it** that in a case where there is a transaction effected by means of **exchange and** one of the parties **is particular that** the value of the items is equal, **he does not acquire** the item immediately. In contrast to the standard case of exchange, the owners of the cow and donkey assessed the value of the animals before the transaction. Since they are particular about the price, the acquisition is not completed until each pulls the item he is acquiring.


###### Bava Metzia 47a:7
[Bava Metzia 47a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/47a:7)

אָמַר רָבָא: אַטּוּ חֲלִיפִין בְּשׁוּפְטָנֵי עָסְקִינַן, דְּלָא קָפְדִי? אֶלָּא כׇּל חֲלִיפִין מִיקְפָּד קָפְדִי וְקָנָה. וְהָכָא בְּמַאי עָסְקִינַן – דַּאֲמַר לֵיהּ: חֲמוֹר בְּפָרָה וְטָלֶה, וּמָשַׁךְ אֶת הַפָּרָה וַעֲדַיִין לֹא מָשַׁךְ אֶת הַטָּלֶה, דְּלָא הָוֵה לֵיהּ מְשִׁיכָה מַעַלְיָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said: Is that to say** that in a standard case of **exchange we are dealing with fools, who are not particular** about the value of the items that they are acquiring? **Rather,** in **every** case of **exchange,** the parties **are particular** about the value of the items, **and** when one party pulls an item the other party **acquires** the other item immediately and pays for it later. **And with what are we dealing here?** The case in the *baraita* is **where** one party **said to** the other party: Let us exchange **a donkey for a cow and a lamb, and** the owner of the donkey **pulled the cow and did not yet pull the lamb, as** in that case **he has not** performed **a proper** act of **pulling.**


###### Bava Metzia 47a:8
[Bava Metzia 47a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/47a:8)

אָמַר מָר: ״מְכוֹר לִי בְּאֵלּוּ״ – קָנָה, וְיֵשׁ לוֹ עָלָיו אוֹנָאָה. לֵימָא סָבַר רַב הוּנָא מַטְבֵּעַ נַעֲשֶׂה חֲלִיפִין?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**The Master,** Rav Huna, **said** above that if one said to another: **Sell me** your item **for these** coins, the buyer **acquired** the article, **and** if the sum of money is one-sixth lower than the value of the item, the seller of the item **has a** claim of **exploitation against** the buyer. The Gemara suggests: **Let us say** based on that *halakha* **that Rav Huna holds** that **a coin can be** an item used to effect **exchange.**


###### Bava Metzia 47a:9
[Bava Metzia 47a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/47a:9)

לָא, רַב הוּנָא סָבַר לַהּ כְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן דְּאָמַר: דְּבַר תּוֹרָה מָעוֹת קוֹנוֹת. וּמִפְּנֵי מָה אָמְרוּ מְשִׁיכָה קוֹנָה – גְּזֵירָה שֶׁמָּא יֹאמַר לוֹ נִשְׂרְפוּ חִטֶּיךָ בַּעֲלִיָּיה. מִלְּתָא דִּשְׁכִיחָא – גְּזַרוּ בַּהּ רַבָּנַן, וּמִלְּתָא דְּלָא שְׁכִיחָא – לָא גְּזַרוּ בַּהּ רַבָּנַן. אֲמַר לֵיהּ מָר הוּנָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב נַחְמָן לְרַב אָשֵׁי: אַתּוּן, הָכִי מַתְנִיתוּ לַהּ, אֲנַן הָכִי מַתְנֵינַן לַהּ: וְכֵן אָמַר רַב הוּנָא, אֵין מַטְבֵּעַ נַעֲשֶׂה חֲלִיפִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this suggestion: **No, Rav Huna holds in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yoḥanan, who says: By Torah law money effects acquisition. And for what reason did** the Sages **say** that **pulling acquires** an item and money does not? This is a rabbinic **decree lest** the seller **say to** the buyer after receiving the money: **Your wheat was burned in the upper story. And** it is only **with regard to a common matter** that **the Sages issued a decree, but with regard to an uncommon matter the Sages did not issue a decree.** Therefore, in this case there is no decree, and the transaction is governed by Torah law. **Mar Huna, son of Rav Naḥman, said to Rav Ashi: You teach** this *halakha* **in that** manner; **we teach it in this** manner, not by inference but as an explicit ruling: **And likewise, Rav Huna said: Money cannot be** the item used to effect a transaction by means of **exchange.**


###### Bava Metzia 47a:10
[Bava Metzia 47a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/47a:10)

בַּמֶּה קוֹנִין?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ Above, the Gemara mentioned a form of exchange in which there are not two items of equal value being exchanged, but rather one person attempts to transfer possession of his item to the buyer by means of a symbolic exchange involving, e.g., a cloth. With regard to that symbolic transaction, the Gemara asks: **With what** vessel **does one acquire** the item in question, i.e., whose vessel is used in order to effect this symbolic transaction?


###### Bava Metzia 47a:11
[Bava Metzia 47a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/47a:11)

רַב אָמַר: בְּכִלְיוֹ שֶׁל קוֹנֶה. דְּנִיחָא לֵיהּ לְקוֹנֶה דְּלֶהֱוֵי מַקְנֶה קוֹנֶה, כִּי הֵיכִי דְּלִגְמַר וְלַקְנֵי לֵיהּ. וְלֵוִי אָמַר: בְּכִלְיוֹ שֶׁל מַקְנֶה, כִּדְבָעֵינַן לְמֵימַר לְקַמַּן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav says:** One effects the transaction **with the vessels of the one acquiring** the item, who effects the transaction by giving the vessels to the owner of the item. The moment that the owner pulls the vessel into his possession, the transaction is complete and ownership of the item in question is transferred to his counterpart. Rav explains **that the one acquiring** the item **is amenable to having the one transferring ownership** of the item **acquire** his vessel, **so that he will resolve to transfer ownership to him. And Levi says:** One effects the transaction **by** having the one acquiring the item pull **the vessels of the one transferring ownership, as we seek to explain below.**


###### Bava Metzia 47a:12
[Bava Metzia 47a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/47a:12)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב הוּנָא מִדִּסְקַרְתָּא לְרָבָא: וּלְלֵוִי, דְּאָמַר בְּכִלְיוֹ שֶׁל מַקְנֶה, הָא קָא קָנֵי אַרְעָא אַגַּב גְּלִימָא. אִם כֵּן, הָווּ לֵיהּ נְכָסִים שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהֶן אַחְרָיוּת וְנִקְנִין עִם נְכָסִים שֶׁאֵין לָהֶן אַחְרָיוּת. וַאֲנַן אִיפְּכָא תְּנַן: נְכָסִים שֶׁאֵין לָהֶן אַחְרָיוּת נִקְנִין עִם נְכָסִים שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהֶן אַחְרָיוּת!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Huna from Diskarta said to Rava: But according to Levi, who says** that one effects the transaction **with the vessels of the one transferring ownership,** there is a difficulty. In a case where one acquires land by means of symbolic exchange where the item used is a cloak, it turns out **that** he is **acquiring land by means of a cloak. If so,** this **is** a case of **property that is guaranteed,** i.e., land, **and it is acquired with** movable **property that is not guaranteed,** by means of a transaction performed on the latter. **And we learned the opposite** in a mishna (*Kiddushin* 26a): **Property that is not guaranteed is acquired with property that is guaranteed,** i.e., land, by means of a transaction performed on the latter.


###### Bava Metzia 47a:13
[Bava Metzia 47a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/47a:13)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אִי הֲוָה לֵוִי הָכָא, הֲוָה מַפֵּיק לְאַפָּךְ פּוּלְסֵי דְנוּרָא! מִי סָבְרַתְּ גְּלִימָא מַקְנֵה לֵיהּ? בְּהָהִיא הֲנָאָה דְּקָא מְקַבֵּל מִינֵּיהּ – גָּמַר וּמַקְנֵי לֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rava **said to him: If Levi,** whose opinion you questioned, **were here, he would take out rods of fire before you** and flog you for your unwarranted question. **Do you maintain** that he said that at the moment he transfers ownership of the **cloak he transfers ownership** of the land **to him?** That is not the case; rather, **in** exchange for **that pleasure** the owner of the item experiences from the fact that the one acquiring the cloak **accepted it from him, he resolves to transfer ownership to him.** This is unlike the acquisition of movable items by means of a transaction of land, where both are acquired simultaneously. Here, the transfer of ownership of the cloak effects the subsequent transfer of ownership of the land.


###### Bava Metzia 47a:14
[Bava Metzia 47a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/47a:14)

כְּתַנָּאֵי: ״וְזֹאת לְפָנִים בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל עַל הַגְּאוּלָּה וְעַל הַתְּמוּרָה לְקַיֵּם כׇּל דָּבָר שָׁלַף אִישׁ נַעֲלוֹ וְנָתַן לְרֵעֵהוּ״. ״גְּאוּלָּה״ – זוֹ מְכִירָה, וְכֵן הוּא אוֹמֵר: ״לֹא יִגָּאֵל״. ״תְּמוּרָה״ – זוֹ חֲלִיפִין, וְכֵן הוּא אוֹמֵר: ״לֹא יַחֲלִיפֶנּוּ וְלֹא יָמִיר אוֹתוֹ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara comments: This dispute between Rav and Levi is **parallel to** a dispute between ***tanna’im*.** The verse states: **“Now this was the custom in former time in Israel concerning redemption and concerning substitution, to confirm all matters; a man drew off his shoe, and gave it to his neighbor”** (Ruth 4:7). The verse is interpreted: **“Redemption”; that is a sale. And likewise it says:** “Neither shall be sold **nor shall be redeemed”** (Leviticus 27:28). **“Substitution”; that is** the transaction of **exchange. And likewise it says: “He may neither exchange it nor substitute it”** (Leviticus 27:10).


###### Bava Metzia 47a:15
[Bava Metzia 47a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/47a:15)

״לְקַיֵּם כׇּל דָּבָר שָׁלַף אִישׁ נַעֲלוֹ וְנָתַן לְרֵעֵהוּ״. מִי נָתַן לְמִי? בּוֹעַז נָתַן לַגּוֹאֵל. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: גּוֹאֵל נָתַן לְבוֹעַז.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
With regard to the phrase **“To confirm all matters; a man drew off his shoe, and gave it to his neighbor,”** the *baraita* asks: **Who gave** the shoe **to whom? Boaz gave** his shoe **to the redeemer,** the closest relative of Elimelech, who had the right of first refusal to the land that Naomi, Elimelech’s widow, was planning to sell. The redeemer was transferring that right to the land to Boaz, who was acquiring it by means of his shoe. **Rabbi Yehuda says:** The **redeemer gave** his shoe **to Boaz.** The dispute between Rav and Levi is parallel to the dispute between the first *tanna* and Rabbi Yehuda.


###### Bava Metzia 47a:16
[Bava Metzia 47a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/47a:16)

תָּנָא: קוֹנִין בִּכְלִי אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ שָׁוֶה פְּרוּטָה. אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא בִּכְלִי, אֲבָל בְּפֵירֵי – לָא. רַב שֵׁשֶׁת אָמַר: אֲפִילּוּ בְּפֵירוֹת. מַאי טַעְמָא דְּרַב נַחְמָן? אָמַר קְרָא ״נַעֲלוֹ״, נַעַל – אִין, מִידֵּי אַחֲרִינָא – לָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ It **was taught: One can acquire** property through a symbolic exchange **by** using **a vessel, even if it does not** have the **value of one *peruta*. Rav Naḥman says:** The Sages **taught** that this symbolic exchange can be effected **only by** using **a vessel, but not by** using **produce,** i.e., any item other than a vessel. **Rav Sheshet says:** It can be effected **even by** using **produce.** The Gemara explains: **What is the reason** for the opinion **of Rav Naḥman? The verse states: “His shoe”** (Ruth 4:7), from which it is derived: With regard to **a shoe** and any other item similar to a shoe, i.e., a vessel, **yes,** the symbolic exchange can be effected; with regard to any **item other** than a vessel, **no,** it cannot be effected.


###### Bava Metzia 47a:17
[Bava Metzia 47a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/47a:17)

מַאי טַעְמֵיהּ דְּרַב שֵׁשֶׁת, אָמַר קְרָא: ״לְקַיֵּם כׇּל דָּבָר״. לְרַב נַחְמָן נָמֵי, הָכְתִיב: ״לְקַיֵּם כׇּל דָּבָר״! הַהוּא לְקַיֵּם כׇּל דָּבָר, דְּנִיקְנִין בְּמִנְעָל. וְרַב שֵׁשֶׁת נָמֵי, הָכְתִיב: ״נַעֲלוֹ״! אָמַר לְךָ רַב שֵׁשֶׁת: מָה נַעֲלוֹ דָּבָר הַמְסוּיָּים – אַף כׇּל דָּבָר הַמְסוּיָּים, לְאַפּוֹקֵי חֲצִי רִמּוֹן וַחֲצִי אֱגוֹז, דְּלָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**What is the reason** for the opinion **of Rav Sheshet? The verse** in Ruth **states: “To confirm all matters,”** from which it is derived that all items, even if they are not vessels, can effect the exchange. The Gemara asks: **According to Rav Naḥman as well, isn’t it written: “To confirm all matters”?** The Gemara explains: In his opinion, **that** phrase: **“To confirm all matters,”** is referring to all items **that can be acquired** through an exchange effected **by** using **a shoe.** The Gemara asks: **And** according to **Rav Sheshet as well, isn’t it written: “His shoe”?** The Gemara explains: **Rav Sheshet** could have **said to you** that from that term it is derived: **Just as his shoe is a complete item, so too, every complete item** can effect a symbolic exchange, **to exclude half a pomegranate and half a nut, which cannot** effect a symbolic exchange. A whole pomegranate or nut can be used for that purpose.


###### Bava Metzia 47a:18
[Bava Metzia 47a:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/47a:18)

אָמַר רַב שֵׁשֶׁת בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב אִידִי: כְּמַאן כָּתְבִינַן הָאִידָּנָא ״בְּמָנָא דְּכָשַׁר לְמִקְנְיָא בֵּיהּ״. ״בְּמָנָא״ – לְאַפּוֹקֵי מִדְּרַב שֵׁשֶׁת, דְּאָמַר קוֹנִין בְּפֵירוֹת. ״דְּכָשַׁר״ – לְאַפּוֹקֵי מִדִּשְׁמוּאֵל, דְּאָמַר קוֹנִין

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Sheshet, son of Rav Idi, said: In accordance with whose** opinion **do we write today** in documents that the transaction was effected **with a vessel that is fit to acquire** items **with it?** The Gemara explains: The term **with a vessel** serves **to exclude** the opinion **of Rav Sheshet,** who **says: One acquires** an item through a transaction of symbolic exchange **by** using **produce.** The term **that is fit** serves **to exclude** the opinion **of Shmuel, who says: One acquires** an item