## Bava Metzia Daf 76b

###### Bava Metzia 76b:1
[Bava Metzia 76b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/76b:1)

הָכִי הַשְׁתָּא?! בִּשְׁלָמָא אִי אִיתְּמַר אִיפְּכָא, ״הִתְקַבֵּל לִי גִּיטִּי״ וְאִשְׁתְּךָ אָמְרָה, ״הָבֵא לִי גִּיטִּי״, וְהוּא אוֹמֵר: ״הֵילָךְ כְּמוֹ שֶׁאָמְרָה״. וְאָמַר רַב נַחְמָן אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר אֲבוּהּ אָמַר רַב: מִשֶּׁיַּגִּיעַ גֵּט לְיָדוֹ – מְגוֹרֶשֶׁת, אַלְמָא דְּאַדִּיבּוּרָא דִּידַהּ קָא סְמִיךְ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**How can** these cases **be compared? Granted, if the opposite was stated,** i.e., in a case where the woman said: **Receive my bill of divorce for me,** and the agent said to the husband: **Your wife said: Bring me my bill of divorce, and** the husband **said: Here you are, as she said; and Rav Naḥman says** that **Rabba bar Avuh says** that **Rav says: From when the bill of divorce reaches** the agent’s **possession, she is divorced,** it would be understandable. **Apparently,** the husband **relies upon her statement** that the agent is an agent of receipt.


###### Bava Metzia 76b:2
[Bava Metzia 76b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/76b:2)

אִי נָמֵי: מִשֶּׁהִגִּיעַ גֵּט לְיָדָהּ מְגוֹרֶשֶׁת – אַלְמָא דְּאַדִּיבּוּרָא דִּידֵיהּ קָא סָמֵיךְ. אֶלָּא הָתָם – מִשּׁוּם דְּעָקַר שָׁלִיחַ לִשְׁלִיחוּתֵיהּ לִגְמָרֵי, דְּאָמַר לֵיהּ: ״שָׁלִיחַ לְִקַבָּלָה הָוֵינָא, לְהוֹלָכָה לָא הָוֵינָא״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Alternatively,** had Rav Naḥman ruled: **From when the bill of divorce reaches her possession, she is divorced,** one could conclude that **evidently,** the husband **relies on** the agent’s **statement,** and based on that statement, the agent is designated as an agent for delivery. **But there,** in the case cited, where Rav Naḥman rules that she is not divorced, it is not because the husband relies on one statement or the other. Rather, it is **due to** the fact **that** by means of his statement **the agent negates his agency entirely, as he said to** the husband: **I am an agent for receipt,** meaning: **I am not to be** an agent **for delivery.** He is essentially saying that he is not prepared to go to the trouble of delivering the bill of divorce to her. Therefore, even if he does ultimately deliver the bill of divorce to her, he is an agent neither for the woman nor for her husband. No conclusion can be drawn with regard to the question of which statement the husband relies upon.


###### Bava Metzia 76b:3
[Bava Metzia 76b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/76b:3)

אִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא: הַאי תַּנָּא ״חָזְרוּ״ נָמֵי ״הִטְעוּ״ קָרֵי לֵיהּ, דְּתַנְיָא: הַשּׂוֹכֵר אֶת הָאוּמָּנִין וְהִטְעוּ אֶת בַּעַל הַבַּיִת, אוֹ בַּעַל הַבַּיִת הִטְעָה אוֹתָן – אֵין לָהֶם זֶה עַל זֶה אֶלָּא תַּרְעוֹמֶת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara had assumed that the term deceived used in the mishna must be referring to an inaccuracy stated by the middleman in his discussion with the laborers. The Gemara now offers an alternative explanation. **If you wish, say** that when the mishna teaches: They deceived one another, it means that one of the parties reneged on the agreement, as **this *tanna* also calls** a circumstance described by the term **reneged,** meaning that either the employer or the laborers reneged on their agreement, by the term **deceived. As it is taught** in a *baraita* in a similar manner: With regard to **one who hires artisans** or laborers, **and they deceived the employer, or the employer deceived them, they have nothing but a grievance against one another,** and no monetary claim.


###### Bava Metzia 76b:4
[Bava Metzia 76b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/76b:4)

בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים? שֶׁלֹּא הָלְכוּ. אֲבָל הָלְכוּ חַמָּרִים וְלֹא מָצְאוּ תְּבוּאָה, פּוֹעֲלִין וּמָצְאוּ שָׂדֶה כְּשֶׁהִיא לַחָה – נוֹתֵן לָהֶן שְׂכָרָן מִשָּׁלֵם, אֲבָל אֵינוֹ דּוֹמֶה הַבָּא טָעוּן לַבָּא רֵיקָן, עוֹשֶׂה מְלָאכָה לְיוֹשֵׁב וּבָטֵל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues: **In what** case **is this statement said? When they did not go** to the workplace, i.e., the employer reneged immediately. **But** if **donkey drivers went and could not find** any **produce** to carry, or **laborers** went off to work **and found that the field was** too **moist** for tilling, the employer **must give them their full wages** to which they are entitled. **But** he does not give them the entire stipulated amount, as a donkey driver **who comes** back **loaded cannot be compared to one who comes** back **empty,** nor can a laborer **who performs work** be compared **to one who sits idle.** The employer deducts a sum from the laborers’ wages, paying them the amount they are willing to receive given that they do not actually have to perform the work.


###### Bava Metzia 76b:5
[Bava Metzia 76b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/76b:5)

בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים? שֶׁלֹּא הִתְחִילוּ בִּמְלָאכָה, אֲבָל הִתְחִילוּ בִּמְלָאכָה – שָׁמִין לָהֶן מַה שֶּׁעָשׂוּ. כֵּיצַד? קִבְּלוּ קָמָה לִקְצוֹר בִּשְׁנֵי סְלָעִים, קָצְרוּ חֶצְיָהּ וְהִנִּיחוּ חֶצְיָהּ. בֶּגֶד לֶאֱרוֹג בִּשְׁנֵי סְלָעִים, אָרְגוּ חֶצְיוֹ וְהִנִּיחוּ חֶצְיוֹ – שָׁמִין לָהֶן אֶת מַה שֶּׁעָשׂוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**In what** case **is this statement,** that if they reneged they have only a grievance, **said? When they had not started the work** at all. **But** if **they had started the work,** the court **appraises for them that which they have done,** for which they receive some form of compensation. **How so?** If **they received standing grain to reap for** a contractual agreement of **two *sela*** for the entire field, and **they reaped half of it and left half of it,** or if they took **a garment to weave at two *sela*,** and **they weaved half of it and left half of it,** in these cases the court **appraises for them that which they have done.**


###### Bava Metzia 76b:6
[Bava Metzia 76b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/76b:6)

הָיָה יָפֶה שִׁשָּׁה דִּינָרִים – נוֹתֵן לָהֶן סֶלַע, אוֹ יִגְמְרוּ מְלַאכְתָּן וְיִטְּלוּ שְׁנֵי סְלָעִים. וְאִם סֶלַע – נוֹתֵן לָהֶם סֶלַע.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* details this appraisal: **If** the current wage for the part of the task they had done **was** now **worth six dinars,** a *sela* and a half, as the price for this assignment increased, either **he gives them a *sela*,** as originally agreed upon, since they do not forfeit their stipulated wages, **or they finish their work and take two *sela*. And if** the current wage for the part of the task they had done was worth **a *sela*, he gives them a *sela*.** This statement will be explained by the Gemara.


###### Bava Metzia 76b:7
[Bava Metzia 76b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/76b:7)

רַבִּי דּוֹסָא אוֹמֵר: שָׁמִין לָהֶן מַה שֶּׁעָתִיד לְהֵעָשׂוֹת, הָיָה יָפֶה שִׁשָּׁה דִּינָרִים – נוֹתֵן לָהֶם שֶׁקֶל, אוֹ יִגְמְרוּ מְלַאכְתָּן וְיִטְּלוּ שְׁנֵי סְלָעִים. וְאִם סֶלַע – נוֹתֵן לָהֶם סֶלַע.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Dosa says:** The court **appraises for them that which must** still **be done.** If the current wage for the part of the task they had not done **was worth six dinars,** i.e., he can only find laborers who will complete it for six dinars, which is equivalent to one and a half *sela*, either **he gives** the first laborers **a shekel,** which is equivalent to half a *sela*, **or they finish their work and take two *sela*. And if** the current wage for the part of the task they had not done was worth **a *sela*, he gives them a *sela*.**


###### Bava Metzia 76b:8
[Bava Metzia 76b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/76b:8)

בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים? בְּדָבָר שֶׁאֵין אָבוּד, אֲבָל בְּדָבָר הָאָבוּד – שׂוֹכֵר עֲלֵיהֶן אוֹ מַטְעָן. כֵּיצַד מַטְעָן? אוֹמֵר לָהֶן: סֶלַע קָצַצְתִּי לָכֶם – בֹּאוּ וּטְלוּ שְׁתַּיִם. וְעַד כַּמָּה שׂוֹכֵר עֲלֵיהֶן? עַד אַרְבָּעִים וַחֲמִשִּׁים זוּז.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues: **In what** case **is this statement said,** i.e., in what circumstance are the laborers paid for the amount they performed and the employer has only a grievance against them? It is said **with regard to a matter that** does **not** involve financial **loss** due to the work stoppage, **but with regard to a matter that** involves financial **loss** due to the work stoppage, the employer **may hire** replacement laborers for a high price **at** the expense of the first laborers **or deceive** the first laborers. **How does he deceive them?** For example, **he** can **say to them: I fixed a *sela*** as wages **for you; come and take two. And up to what** amount **may he hire at their** expense? Even **up to forty or fifty dinars.** He can pay other laborers far more than the first laborers’ wages to ensure that the work is completed.


###### Bava Metzia 76b:9
[Bava Metzia 76b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/76b:9)

בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים? בִּזְמַן שֶׁאֵין שָׁם פּוֹעֲלִים לִשְׂכּוֹר. אֲבָל יֵשׁ שָׁם פּוֹעֲלִים לִשְׂכּוֹר, וְאָמַר: ״צֵא וּשְׂכוֹר מֵאֵלּוּ״ – אֵין לוֹ עֲלֵיהֶן אֶלָּא תַּרְעוֹמֶת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**In what** case **is this statement said,** i.e., in what circumstance may the employer deceive them to such an extent in order to ensure that the work is completed? **When there are no** other **laborers there,** in that place, **to hire.** Since the employer will suffer a heavy loss, he may resort to one of these methods. **But if there are laborers there to hire, and** the laborers who reneged **said** to the employer: **Go and hire from these,** the employer **has nothing but a grievance against them.**


###### Bava Metzia 76b:10
[Bava Metzia 76b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/76b:10)

תָּנֵי תַּנָּא קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב: נוֹתֵן לָהֶם שְׂכָרָן מִשָּׁלֵם. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: חֲבִיבִי אָמַר, אִילּוּ אֲנָא הֲוַאי – לָא הֲוָה יָהֵיבְנָא לָהֶן אֶלָּא כְּפוֹעֵל בָּטֵל, וְאַתְּ אָמְרַתְּ נוֹתֵן לָהֶם שְׂכָרָן מִשָּׁלֵם! וְהָא עֲלַהּ קָתָנֵי: אֵינוֹ דּוֹמֶה הַבָּא טָעוּן לְהַבָּא רֵיקָן, עוֹשֶׂה מְלָאכָה לְיוֹשֵׁב וּבָטֵל! לָא סַיְּימוּהָ קַמֵּיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**A *tanna* taught** that *baraita* **before Rav:** The employer **must give them their full wages.** Rav **said to him: My uncle [*ḥavivi*],** Rabbi Ḥiyya, **said: If I were** ruling on this case, **I would give them only** the wages **of an idle laborer,** but no more, **and** yet **you said** that **he gives them their full wages?** The Gemara asks: **But** the *baraita* **teaches concerning this** very matter: A donkey driver **who comes** back **loaded cannot be compared to one who comes** back **empty,** nor can a laborer **who performs work** be compared **to one who sits idle.** Evidently, even the *tanna* of the *baraita* agrees that they do not receive their full wages. The Gemara answers: The *tanna* teaching the *baraita* **before Rav did not conclude it,** and he was unaware of this limitation, which is why he commented that they do not deserve their entire wages.


###### Bava Metzia 76b:11
[Bava Metzia 76b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/76b:11)

אִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי: סַיְּימוּהָ קַמֵּיהּ, וְהָכִי קָאָמַר. חֲבִיבִי אֲמַר: אִי הֲוַאי אֲנָא – לָא הֲוָה יָהֵיבְנָא לֵיהּ כְּלָל, וְאַתְּ אָמְרַתְּ כְּפוֹעֵל בָּטֵל! אֶלָּא קַשְׁיָא הָךְ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**There are** those **who say** that the *tanna* indeed **concluded it before him, and this is what** Rav **is saying: My uncle said: If I were** ruling on this case **I would not give them anything, and** yet **you said** that he gives them the wages **of an idle laborer?** The Gemara questions this version: **But this** is **difficult.** How can one account for the difference between the ruling of the *baraita* and that of Rav’s uncle, Rabbi Ḥiyya?


###### Bava Metzia 76b:12
[Bava Metzia 76b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/76b:12)

לָא קַשְׁיָא: הָא דְּסַיְּירַהּ לְאַרְעֵיהּ מִדְּאוּרְתָּא, הָא דְּלָא סַיְּירַהּ לְאַרְעֵיהּ מֵאוּרְתָּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds: It is **not difficult,** as **this** case, where Rabbi Ḥiyya would rule that the laborers are not paid at all, is referring to one **who surveyed his land the night before,** observed that it was fit to be tilled, and hired laborers on the basis of this examination. It is their misfortune that something occurred in the meantime to prevent them from carrying out the task. Conversely, **that** case, where the *baraita* rules that they are given some payment, is referring to a landowner **who did not survey his land the night before.** Since he failed to check his own field, he must bear the responsibility.


###### Bava Metzia 76b:13
[Bava Metzia 76b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/76b:13)

כִּי הָא דְּאָמַר רָבָא: הַאי מַאן דַּאֲגַר אֲגִירֵי לְרִפְקָא וַאֲתָא מִטְרָא וּמַלְיַיהּ מַיָּא, אִי סַיְּירַהּ לְאַרְעֵיהּ מֵאוּרְתָּא –

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
This **is like that which Rava said:** With regard to **one who hires laborers to till, and rain fell and filled** his land with **water,** preventing the laborers from performing the work, **if he surveyed his land the night before** and did all he could,