## Bava Metzia Daf 62b

###### Bava Metzia 62b:1
[Bava Metzia 62b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/62b:1)

וּבְדִינֵינוּ אֵין מַחְזִירִין מִמַּלְוֶה לְלֹוֶה. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אִינְהוּ, בְּתוֹרַת זְבִינֵי אֲתָא לִידַיְיהוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** yet, **by our laws one does not return** the interest **from the lender to the borrower.** Since the interest was not fixed from the outset, and there is also no certainty that he will consume any produce, this is merely a case of a hint of interest. Rav Ashi **said to him:** The gentiles do not consider that transaction a loan; rather, **they** see this as a case where the field **came into his possession** by means of a transaction **in the form of a sale.** The field was temporarily sold to the lender, who sells it back to the borrower when the debt is paid.


###### Bava Metzia 62b:2
[Bava Metzia 62b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/62b:2)

אֶלָּא כֹּל שֶׁאִילּוּ בְּדִינֵיהֶן, דְּקָאָמַר רַב סָפְרָא: מַאי אֲתָא לְאַשְׁמוֹעִינַן! הָכִי אֲתָא לְאַשְׁמוֹעִינַן: כֹּל שֶׁאִילּוּ בְּדִינֵיהֶן מוֹצִיאִין מִלֹּוֶה לְמַלְוֶה, בְּדִינֵינוּ מַחְזִירִין מִמַּלְוֶה לְלֹוֶה, וּמַאי נִיהוּ – בְּרִבִּית קְצוּצָה, וְכִדְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But** if one is a case of deposit and the other is a case of sale, the principle that begins with: **Any** case **where by their laws, that Rav Safra is saying, what is he coming to teach us?** The Gemara answers that **this** is what **he is coming to teach us:** In **any** case **where by their laws one removes** the interest **from** the possession of **the borrower** to give **to the lender, by our laws one returns** the interest **from the lender to the borrower. And what is** that case? It is a case **of fixed interest, and** it is **in accordance with** the opinion **of Rabbi Elazar.**


###### Bava Metzia 62b:3
[Bava Metzia 62b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/62b:3)

כֹּל שֶׁאִילּוּ בְּדִינֵיהֶם אֵין מוֹצִיאִין, בְּדִינֵינוּ אֵין מַחְזִירִין – רִבִּית מוּקְדֶּמֶת, רִבִּית מְאוּחֶרֶת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
And as for the statement that in **any** case **where by their laws one does not remove** the interest from the possession of the borrower to give to the lender, **by our laws one does not return** the interest from the lender to the borrower, this is referring to a case of **prior interest,** i.e., interest paid prior to the granting of a loan in order to induce the lender to grant the loan, and **subsequent interest,** i.e., a gift given after a loan has been repaid to show thanks to the lender for lending the money. Although paying these types of interest is prohibited, as they are not actually part of the agreement, by our laws one does not compel the lender to return those payments.


###### Bava Metzia 62b:4
[Bava Metzia 62b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/62b:4)

כֵּיצַד: לָקַח הֵימֶנּוּ חִטִּים בְּדִינַר זָהָב הַכּוֹר, וְכֵן הַשַּׁעַר וְכוּ׳. וְכִי אֵין לוֹ יַיִן, מַאי הָוֵי?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: **How so?** For example, **one acquired wheat from** another at the price **of** one ***kor*** of wheat **for** one **gold dinar,** worth twenty-five silver dinars, with the wheat to be supplied at a later date, **and such** was **the** market **price** of wheat at the time he acquired it. The price of a *kor* of wheat then increased and stood at thirty dinars. At that point, the buyer said to the seller: Give me all of my wheat now, as I wish to sell it and purchase wine with it. The seller said to him: Each *kor* of your wheat is considered by me to be worth thirty dinars, and you have the right to collect its value in wine from me. And in this case, the seller does not have wine in his possession. The seller is considered to be a borrower with regard to the lender, who is viewed as lending the wheat to the seller. The Gemara asks: **And if he does not have** any **wine, what of it?** Why is this factor relevant?


###### Bava Metzia 62b:5
[Bava Metzia 62b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/62b:5)

וְהָתַנְיָא: אֵין פּוֹסְקִין עַל הַפֵּירוֹת עַד שֶׁיֵּצֵא הַשַּׁעַר, יָצָא הַשַּׁעַר – פּוֹסְקִין, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין לָזֶה, יֵשׁ לָזֶה!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**But isn’t it taught** in a *baraita*: When purchasing produce to be collected by the buyer at a later stage, **one may not set** a price for **produce until the** market **rate is publicized.** If **the rate has been publicized, one may set** a price, despite the fact that the seller is not actually in possession of any such produce, as **even though this** seller **does not have** any of that produce, **that** one, i.e., another seller, **does have** some of that produce, which the first seller could purchase at the market rate. Evidently, once the market rate is publicized, the transaction is considered a purchase and not a loan with interest, even if the buyer does not receive the produce immediately.


###### Bava Metzia 62b:6
[Bava Metzia 62b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/62b:6)

אָמַר רַבָּה: מַתְנִיתִין בְּבָא לָחוּב בִּדְמֵיהֶן עָסְקִינַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabba said:** In **the mishna, we are dealing with one who comes to incur a debt for their value,** i.e., for the value of the wine. If the borrower, i.e., the seller, possessed wine at that time he would have transferred it to the lender, i.e., the buyer, in place of the wheat, and this could have constituted a proper sale. Since he did not possess any wine, he promised it to the seller at a later date for a higher price, and this constituted a loan with interest as opposed to a sale.


###### Bava Metzia 62b:7
[Bava Metzia 62b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/62b:7)

וְכִדְתַנְיָא: הֲרֵי שֶׁהָיָה נוֹשֶׁה בַּחֲבֵירוֹ מָנֶה, וְהָלַךְ וְעָמַד עַל גּוֹרְנוֹ, וְאוֹמֵר: תֵּן לִי מְעוֹתַי, שֶׁאֲנִי רוֹצֶה לִיקַּח בָּהֶם חִטִּים. אָמַר לוֹ: חִטִּים יֵשׁ לִי שֶׁאֲנִי נוֹתֵן לְךָ, צֵא וַעֲשֵׂה עָלַי כְּשַׁעַר שֶׁל עַכְשָׁיו, וַאֲנִי אַעֲלֶה לְךָ כׇּל שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר חֹדֶשׁ – אָסוּר, דְּלָאו כְּאִיסָּרוֹ הַבָּא לְיָדוֹ דָּמֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** this is **as it is taught** in a *baraita*: **If** a person **was owed one hundred dinars by another, and he went and stood by** the other’s **granary and said** to him: **Give me my money, as I wish to buy wheat with it.** And the debtor **said to him: I have wheat** in my granary **that I will give you; go and calculate for me** the amount of wheat to which you are entitled **by the current** market **rate, and I will give you** this amount of wheat over the span of **a full twelve months,** even if the price rises in the interim. Such a practice is **forbidden** because of interest, **as** this is **not similar to** a case where **his *issar* has come into his possession.** Since the lender did not give the borrower even a single *issar* as payment for the wheat, this is not a sale, but a loan with interest.


###### Bava Metzia 62b:8
[Bava Metzia 62b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/62b:8)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ אַבָּיֵי: אִי דְּלָא כְּאִיסָּרוֹ הַבָּא לְיָדוֹ, מַאי אִירְיָא ״אֵין לוֹ״? אֲפִילּוּ יֵשׁ לוֹ נָמֵי! אֶלָּא אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: מַתְנִיתִין, כִּדְתָנֵי רַב סָפְרָא בְּרִבִּית דְּבֵי רַבִּי חִיָּיא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye said to** Rabba: **If** this transaction is forbidden because **it is not similar to** a case where **his *issar* has come into his possession, why** does the mishna **specifically** teach the case where **he does not have** wine? **Even if he does have** wine, it would **also** be forbidden, as he gave no money at the time of the acquisition. **Rather, Abaye** rejected Rabba’s explanation and **said: The mishna** should be understood **like** the *baraita* **taught by Rav Safra with regard to** the *halakhot* of **interest,** which was taught originally in the **school of Rabbi Ḥiyya.**


###### Bava Metzia 62b:9
[Bava Metzia 62b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/62b:9)

דְּתָנֵי רַב סָפְרָא בְּרִבִּית דְּבֵי רַבִּי חִיָּיא: יֵשׁ דְּבָרִים שֶׁהֵם מוּתָּרִין וַאֲסוּרִין מִפְּנֵי הַעֲרָמַת רִבִּית. כֵּיצַד? אָמַר לוֹ: הַלְוֵינִי מָנֶה! אָמַר לוֹ: מָנֶה אֵין לִי, חִטִּין בְּמָנֶה יֵשׁ לִי שֶׁאֲנִי נוֹתֵן לָךְ. נָתַן לוֹ חִטִּין בְּמָנֶה, וְחָזַר וּלְקָחָן הֵימֶנּוּ בְּעֶשְׂרִים וְאַרְבַּע סֶלַע – מוּתָּר, וְאָסוּר לַעֲשׂוֹת כֵּן מִפְּנֵי הַעֲרָמַת רִבִּית.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**As Rav Safra taught** a *baraita* from the **school of Rabbi Ḥiyya with regard to interest: There are matters that are** intrinsically **permitted** by Torah law, **but are prohibited because** they are **artifices** used to circumvent transgressing the prohibition of **interest. How so?** If **one said to** another: **Lend me one hundred dinars,** and the other **said to him: I do not have one hundred dinars** but **I have wheat** worth **one hundred dinars that I will give you,** and **he gave him wheat** worth **one hundred dinars, and** later he **went and acquired** the wheat **back from him for twenty-four *sela*,** the equivalent of ninety-six dinars, this is **permitted** by Torah law, as it is considered a double transaction since it included first a loan of the equivalent of one hundred dinars, and then the purchase of the wheat at a discounted rate. **But it is prohibited to do so** by rabbinic law **because** this is **an artifice** allowing the circumvention of transgressing the prohibition **of interest.**


###### Bava Metzia 62b:10
[Bava Metzia 62b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/62b:10)

הָכָא נָמֵי. כְּגוֹן דְּאָמַר: הַלְוֵינִי שְׁלֹשִׁים דִּינָרִים, אֲמַר לֵיהּ: שְׁלֹשִׁים דִּינָרִים אֵין לִי, חִטִּין בִּשְׁלֹשִׁים דִּינָרִים יֵשׁ לִי שֶׁאֲנִי נוֹתֵן לָךְ. נָתַן לוֹ חִטִּין בִּשְׁלֹשִׁים דִּינָרִים, וְחָזַר וּלְקָחָם הֵימֶנּוּ בְּדִינַר זָהָב. אִי אִית לֵיהּ חַמְרָא לְלֹוֶה, דְּיָהֵיב לֵיהּ בִּשְׁלֹשִׁים דִּינָר – פֵּירָא הוּא דְּקָא שָׁקֵיל מִינֵּיהּ, וְלֵית לַן בַּהּ. וְאִי לָא, כֵּיוָן דְּלֵית לֵיהּ חַמְרָא – וַדַּאי מִשְׁקַל זוּזֵי מִינֵּיהּ, מִחֲזֵי כְּרִבִּית.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Here too,** the mishna is referring to a case **where he said** to him: **Lend me thirty dinars,** and the other **said to him: I do not have thirty dinars,** but **I have wheat** worth **thirty dinars that I will give you. He** then **gave him wheat** worth **thirty dinars, and he** subsequently **went and acquired** the wheat **back from him for a gold dinar,** which is worth twenty-five dinars. In this case, **if the borrower has wine that he gives him** in place of the **thirty dinars, it is produce that** the lender **takes from him, and** therefore **we have no** problem **with it. And if not, since he does not have wine, certainly the taking of money from him has** at least **the appearance of interest.**


###### Bava Metzia 62b:11
[Bava Metzia 62b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/62b:11)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רָבָא: אִי הָכִי, ״תֵּן לִי חִיטַּי״, דְּמֵי חִיטַּי מִבְּעֵי לֵיהּ! תְּנִי ״דְּמֵי חִיטַּי״. ״שֶׁאֲנִי מוֹכְרָן״, ״שֶׁמְּכַרְתִּים לָךְ״ מִבַּעְיָא לֵיהּ! תְּנִי ״שֶׁמְּכַרְתִּים לָךְ״. ״הֲרֵי חִטֶּיךָ עֲשׂוּיוֹת עָלַי בִּשְׁלֹשִׁים דִּינָרִין״, מֵעִיקָּרָא נָמֵי הָכִי אוֹקְמִינְהוּ עִילָּוֵיהּ! הָכִי קָאָמַר לֵיהּ: בִּדְמֵי חִטֶּיךָ שֶׁעָשִׂיתָ עָלַי בִּשְׁלֹשִׁים דִּינָר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said to** Abaye: **If so,** your explanation does not accord with the wording of the mishna, as the mishna states: **Give me my wheat,** while according to your interpretation **it should have** said: Give me **the value of my wheat.** Abaye responds: Emend the text and **teach: The value of my wheat.** Rava further asked: The phrase: **As I wish to sell it,** is also imprecise, as **it should have** said: **Which I sold to you.** Abaye again suggests: Emend the text and **teach: Which I sold to you.** Rava raises yet another difficulty concerning the language of the mishna. The *tanna* states: **Your wheat is considered by me** to be worth **thirty dinars,** but while according to your interpretation **he had also established** the price **for him at this** amount **at the outset.** Abaye answers: **This is what he is saying to him:** The wine should be collected **according to the value of your wheat that you calculated for me at thirty dinars.**


###### Bava Metzia 62b:12
[Bava Metzia 62b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/62b:12)

״הֲרֵי לָךְ אֶצְלִי בָּהֶן יַיִן וְיַיִן אֵין לוֹ״, וְהָא ״בְּדִינַר זָהָב הַכּוֹר וְכֵן הַשַּׁעַר״ קָתָנֵי! אֶלָּא אָמַר רָבָא: כִּי שָׁכֵיבְנָא רַבִּי אוֹשַׁעְיָא נְפַק לְווֹתִי,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rava continued to question the wording of the mishna. It states: **And you have** the right to collect **its** value in **wine from me, and he does not have wine** in his possession. **But** the *tanna* **taught:** At the price **of** one ***kor*** of wheat **for** one **gold dinar, and indeed** that is **the** market **price** of wheat at the time. Both of these clauses do not accord with Abaye’s explanation. **Rather, Rava said** another explanation. He prefaced it by commenting: **When I die, Rabbi Oshaya will come out** from the Garden of Eden **to greet me,**