## Bava Metzia Daf 52b

###### Bava Metzia 52b:1
[Bava Metzia 52b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/52b:1)

יָתֵר עַל כֵּן מוֹכְרָהּ בְּשׇׁוְיָהּ. מַאי לָאו: שֶׁפָּחֲתָה יוֹתֵר מִכְּדֵי אוֹנָאָתָהּ? לָא, יְתֵירָה: דְּאַכַּתִּי לָא פָּחֲתָה בִּכְדֵי אוֹנָאָתָהּ, מוֹכְרָהּ בְּשׇׁוְיָהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If the erosion was **greater than that, he may sell** the coin **at its value** as metal, not for its original value. **What,** is it **not that it eroded more than its measure of exploitation?** The Gemara rejects this claim: **No,** the term **greater** means **that** if **it did not yet erode to its measure of exploitation, he may sell it at its value.**


###### Bava Metzia 52b:2
[Bava Metzia 52b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/52b:2)

מֵתִיבִי: עַד כַּמָּה תִּיפָּחֵת, וִיהֵא רַשַּׁאי לְקַיְּימָהּ? בְּסֶלַע – עַד שֶׁקֶל. מַאי לָאו דִּפְחַית פּוּרְתָּא פּוּרְתָּא! לָא, דִּנְפִיל לְנוּרָא וְאִפְּחִית בַּחֲדָא זִימְנָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Another **objection was raised: To** what **extent can** the coin **erode and** one would still **be permitted to maintain it? For a *sela*** that deteriorated, it is permitted to maintain it **up to a shekel,** which is half its value. Does this **not mean that** the *sela* **depreciated little by little,** which indicates that even though it lost half its value, which is far greater than the measure of exploitation, it is still permitted for one to maintain it, and there is no concern about deceit? The Gemara rejects this: **No,** it is referring to a coin **that fell into the fire and eroded all at once,** and therefore no deceit is possible.


###### Bava Metzia 52b:3
[Bava Metzia 52b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/52b:3)

אָמַר מָר: יִקֳּבֶנָּה וְיִתְלֶנָּה בְּצַוַּאר בְּנוֹ אוֹ בְּצַוַּאר בִּתּוֹ. וּרְמִינְהוּ: לֹא יַעֲשֶׂנָּה מִשְׁקָל בֵּין מִשְׁקְלוֹתָיו, וְלֹא יִזְרְקֶנָּה בֵּין גְּרוּטוֹתָיו, וְלֹא יִקֳּבֶנָּה וְיִתְלֶנָּה בְּצַוַּאר בְּנוֹ וּבְצַוַּאר בִּתּוֹ. אֶלָּא: אוֹ יִשְׁחוֹק, אוֹ יִתּוֹךְ, אוֹ יָקוֹץ, אוֹ יוֹלִיךְ לְיָם הַמֶּלַח!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**The Master said** in the *baraita*: If a coin greatly depreciated **he should perforate it, and suspend it** as an ornament **on the neck of his son or the neck of his daughter. And** the Gemara **raises a contradiction** from a *baraita*: With regard to an eroded coin, **one should not make it a weight among his weights, nor cast it among his** metal **scraps [*gerutotav*], nor perforate it and suspend it on the neck of his son or the neck of his daughter,** lest he come to use it by mistake. **Rather,** he should **either grind** it **or melt** it, **or cut** it into pieces, **or take** it and cast it **into the Dead Sea.**


###### Bava Metzia 52b:4
[Bava Metzia 52b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/52b:4)

אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר, וְאָמְרִי לַהּ רַב הוּנָא אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר, לָא קַשְׁיָא: כָּאן – בָּאֶמְצַע, כָּאן – מִן הַצַּד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Elazar said, and some say Rav Huna** said that **Rabbi Elazar said:** This is **not difficult. Here,** where it is permitted to fashion the coin into an ornament, it is in a case where he perforated the coin **in the middle,** and therefore it can no longer be mistaken for a valid coin; **there,** where it is prohibited to fashion the coin into an ornament, it is in a case where he perforated the coin **from the side.** In that case the concern is that he might cut the edge of the coin and use the unperforated remainder to deceive others.


###### Bava Metzia 52b:5
[Bava Metzia 52b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/52b:5)

עַד מָתַי מוּתָּר לְהַחֲזִיר בִּכְרַכִּים? עַד שֶׁיַּרְאֶה לַשּׁוּלְחָנִי. בִּכְפָרִים? עַד עַרְבֵי שַׁבָּתוֹת. מַאי שְׁנָא בְּסֶלַע דִּמְפַלֵּיג, וּמַאי שְׁנָא בְּטַלִּית דְּלָא מְפַלֵּיג?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: **Until when** is it **permitted** for one **to return** a depreciated coin? **In the cities,** one may return it only **until a period** of time has passed **that** would allow him to **show** it **to a money changer,** who is an expert in matters of coins. **In the villages,** where there is no money changer, one may return it only **until Shabbat eves,** when people purchase their Shabbat needs. The Gemara asks: **What is different with regard to a *sela* whereby** the *tanna* **distinguishes** between cities and villages, **and what is different with regard to a garment whereby he does not distinguish** between cities and villages?


###### Bava Metzia 52b:6
[Bava Metzia 52b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/52b:6)

אֲמַר אַבָּיֵי: כִּי תְּנַן נָמֵי מַתְנִיתִין – בְּטַלִּית בִּכְרַכִּין תְּנַן. רָבָא אָמַר: טַלִּית, כֹּל אִינִישׁ קִים לֵיהּ בְּגַוַּהּ. סֶלַע, כֵּיוָן דְּלָאו כֹּל אִינִישׁ קִים לֵיהּ בְּגַוַּהּ אֶלָּא שׁוּלְחָנִי, הִלְכָּךְ בִּכְרַכִּים דְּאִיכָּא שׁוּלְחָנִי – עַד שֶׁיַּרְאֶה לַשּׁוּלְחָנִי. בִּכְפָרִים דְּלֵיכָּא שׁוּלְחָנִי – עַד עַרְבֵי שַׁבָּתוֹת דְּסָלְקִין לְשׁוּקָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye said: When we learned** the *halakha* in **the mishna with regard to a garment as well,** it is **with regard to** its sale in **the cities** that **we learned** it. Concerning the sale of a garment in a village, he can return it even at a later stage. **Rava said:** There is a difference between a garment and a coin. In the case of **a garment, every person is certain with regard to its** value, and presumably the buyer will be informed of his mistake immediately. In the case of **a *sela*, since not every person is certain with regard to its** value, and **rather** it is only **a money changer** who is certain, **therefore, in the cities, where there is a money changer** available, the buyer can return the coin **until a period** of time has passed **that** would allow him to **show** it **to a money changer. In the villages, where there is no money changer** available, he has **until Shabbat eves, when** people **go to the market,** at which point he will discover the actual value of the *sela*.


###### Bava Metzia 52b:7
[Bava Metzia 52b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/52b:7)

וְאִם הָיָה מַכִּירָהּ אֲפִילּוּ לְאַחַר שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר חֹדֶשׁ כּוּ׳. הֵיכָא? אִי בִּכְרַכִּין, הָא אָמְרַתְּ עַד שֶׁיַּרְאֶה לַשּׁוּלְחָנִי. אִי בִּכְפָרִים, הָא אָמְרַתְּ עַד עַרְבֵי שַׁבָּתוֹת!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna teaches: **And** although these are the limits of how much a coin must be eroded in order for there to be exploitation, **if** the one who gave the coin to the aggrieved party **recognized it, he must accept it** back **from him even after twelve months** have passed, no matter how little the erosion affected its value; and he has only a grievance against him. The Gemara asks: **Where** did this occur? **If** it was **in the cities, didn’t you say** that he has only **until a period** of time has passed **that** would allow him to **show** it **to a money changer? If** it was **in the villages, didn’t you say** that he has **until Shabbat eves?**


###### Bava Metzia 52b:8
[Bava Metzia 52b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/52b:8)

אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: מִידַּת חֲסִידוּת שָׁנוּ כָּאן. אִי הָכִי, אֵימָא סֵיפָא: אֵין לוֹ עָלָיו אֶלָּא תַּרְעוֹמֶת. לְמַאן? אִי לְחָסִיד – לָא קַבּוֹלֵי לִיקַבְּלַהּ מִינֵּיהּ, וְלָא תַּרְעוֹמֶת תֶּיהְוֵי לֵיהּ. וְאֶלָּא לְהַאיְךְ דְּקַבְּלַהּ מִינֵּיהּ, וּלְבָתַר דִּמְקַבְּלַהּ מִינֵּיהּ – תַּרְעוֹמֶת תֶּיהְוֵי לֵיהּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Ḥisda said:** The Sages **taught an attribute of piety here,** according to which he must accept it even after considerable time has passed. The Gemara asks: **If so, say the latter clause** of the mishna: **And he has only a grievance against him. For whom** is there a grievance? **If** it is **for the pious** person who accepted the return of the flawed coin although he was not required to accept it, and is teaching that he may have a grievance against the one who requested of him to accept the coin, **let him not accept** the coin **from him and let him not have a grievance. Rather,** perhaps it is referring **to that** person **from whom he accepted** the coin. **But after** the person piously **accepts** return of the coin **from him,** is it reasonable that the one who returned the coin **will have a grievance?**


###### Bava Metzia 52b:9
[Bava Metzia 52b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/52b:9)

הָכִי קָאָמַר: הָא אַחֵר, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין מְקַבְּלָהּ הֵימֶנּוּ – אֵין לוֹ עָלָיו אֶלָּא תַּרְעוֹמֶת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers that **this** is what the *tanna* **is saying: But** with regard to **another** person who is not pious and does not accept the coin, **although he does not accept** return of the coin **from him** after the time has passed, the one who requested that he accept it **has only a grievance against him.** One cannot compel the person from whom he received the coin to accept it in return, as although the coin maintains its value, not everyone is willing to conduct business with a coin whose value is questionable.


###### Bava Metzia 52b:10
[Bava Metzia 52b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/52b:10)

וְנוֹתְנָהּ לְמַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי, וְאֵינוֹ חוֹשֵׁשׁ, שֶׁאֵינוֹ אֶלָּא נֶפֶשׁ רָעָה. אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא, שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ: הַאי מַאן דְּמוֹקֵים אַזּוּזֵי, מִיקְּרֵי נֶפֶשׁ רָעָה. וְהָנֵי מִילֵּי הוּא דְּסָגֵי לְהוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: **And** one **may give** the slightly eroded coin **for** use in the desacralizing **of second-tithe** produce **and he** need **not be concerned, as** one who would refuse to accept a slightly eroded coin **is merely a miserly soul,** while the coin is in fact valid for any use. **Rav Pappa said: Conclude from** this formulation of the mishna that **this one who insists upon** the integrity of **his coins** and accepts only unflawed coins **is characterized as a miserly soul.** The Gemara adds: **And this matter** applies **only if** the flawed coins that he rejected still **circulate.**


###### Bava Metzia 52b:11
[Bava Metzia 52b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/52b:11)

מְסַיַּיע לֵיהּ לְחִזְקִיָּה, דְּאָמַר חִזְקִיָּה: בָּא לְפוֹרְטָהּ – פּוֹרְטָהּ בְּשׇׁוְיָהּ, בָּא לְחַלְּלָהּ – מְחַלְּלָהּ בְּיָפָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara comments: This **supports** the opinion **of Ḥizkiyya, as Ḥizkiyya says:** If one **comes to change** this flawed silver coin for copper coins, **he changes it for its value,** deducting several *perutot* due to erosion. If he **comes to desacralize** second tithe with it, **he desacralizes** the produce **with** it as though its value were that of **an unflawed [*beyafa*]** coin.


###### Bava Metzia 52b:12
[Bava Metzia 52b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/52b:12)

מַאי קָאָמַר? הָכִי קָאָמַר: אַף עַל פִּי כְּשֶׁבָּא לְפוֹרְטָהּ – פּוֹרְטָהּ בְּשׇׁוְיָהּ, כְּשֶׁהוּא מְחַלְּלָהּ – מְחַלְּלָהּ בְּיָפָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What is** Ḥizkiyya **saying?** Is he merely repeating the *halakha* cited in the mishna? The Gemara explains that **this** is what he **is saying: Although when he comes to change** into *perutot* this flawed silver coin upon which he redeemed his second-tithe produce **he changes it for its** actual, not its original, **value, when he desacralizes** second tithe with it, **he desacralizes** the produce **with** it as though it were **an unflawed** coin.


###### Bava Metzia 52b:13
[Bava Metzia 52b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/52b:13)

לְמֵימְרָא דְּסָבַר חִזְקִיָּה דִּמְזַלְזְלִינַן בְּמַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי? וְהָאָמַר חִזְקִיָּה: מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ שָׁוֶה פְּרוּטָה, אוֹמֵר: הוּא וְחוּמְשׁוֹ מְחוּלָּל עַל מָעוֹת הָרִאשׁוֹנוֹת. לְפִי שֶׁאִי אֶפְשָׁר לוֹ לְאָדָם לְצַמְצֵם מְעוֹתָיו!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: Is that **to say that Ḥizkiyya holds that we treat second tithe with contempt,** i.e., we redeem it for less than its actual value? **But doesn’t Ḥizkiyya say:** In the case of **second-tithe** produce **that does not have the value of** even **one *peruta*** and therefore cannot be redeemed, one **says:** The second-tithe produce **and its one-fifth** that is added when one redeems his own second-tithe produce are **desacralized upon the first coins** upon which I already redeemed second-tithe produce worth at least one *peruta*, **because it is impossible for a person to be precise** with **his coins?** Presumably, the value of the coins with which he redeemed the produce somewhat exceeded the value of the produce. Therefore, he can desacralize additional produce worth less than one *peruta* with those coins. Apparently, Ḥizkiyya holds that one may not display contempt for second-tithe produce by redeeming it on coins worth less than its value.


###### Bava Metzia 52b:14
[Bava Metzia 52b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/52b:14)

מַאי ״בְּיָפָה״, בְּתוֹרַת יָפָה. דִּתְרֵי זִילֵי לָא מְזַלְזְלִינַן בֵּיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains: **What** is the meaning of ***beyafa*?** It means that although the coin has eroded, it is accorded **unflawed status,** and one may desacralize second-tithe produce with it. Nevertheless, it is assessed according to its actual, not its original, value, **as we do not treat** second tithe with **two** forms of **contempt.** One may use an eroded coin, but only according to its actual value.


###### Bava Metzia 52b:15
[Bava Metzia 52b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/52b:15)

גּוּפָא. אָמַר חִזְקִיָּה: מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ שָׁוֶה פְּרוּטָה, אוֹמֵר: ״הוּא וְחוּמְשׁוֹ מְחוּלָּל עַל מָעוֹת הָרִאשׁוֹנוֹת״, לְפִי שֶׁאִי אֶפְשָׁר לוֹ לְאָדָם לְצַמְצֵם מְעוֹתָיו.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ Apropos the statement of Ḥizkiyya, the Gemara analyzes **the** matter **itself. Ḥizkiyya said:** In the case of **second-tithe** produce **that does not have the value of one *peruta*** and therefore cannot be redeemed, one **says:** The second-tithe produce **and its one-fifth** that is added when one redeems his own second-tithe produce are **desacralized upon the first coins** upon which I already redeemed second-tithe produce worth at least one *peruta*, **because it is impossible for a person to be precise** with **his coins.**


###### Bava Metzia 52b:16
[Bava Metzia 52b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/52b:16)

מֵיתִיבִי: הַתְּרוּמָה וְהַבִּיכּוּרִים חַיָּיבִין עֲלֵיהֶן מִיתָה וָחוֹמֶשׁ,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara **raises an objection** from a mishna (*Ḥalla* 1:9): With regard to ***teruma* and first fruits,** a non-priest **is liable to** receive the penalty of **death** at the hand of Heaven **for** partaking of **them** intentionally, **and** the Torah imposes the payment of a penalty of **one-fifth** of the value of the produce for partaking of them unwittingly.