## Bava Metzia Daf 80a

###### Bava Metzia 80a:1
[Bava Metzia 80a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/80a:1)

**מַתְנִי׳** הַשּׂוֹכֵר אֶת הַפָּרָה לַחֲרוֹשׁ בָּהָר וְחָרַשׁ בַּבִּקְעָה, אִם נִשְׁבַּר הַקַּנְקַן – פָּטוּר. בַּבִּקְעָה וְחָרַשׁ בָּהָר, אִם נִשְׁבַּר הַקַּנְקַן – חַיָּיב. לָדוּשׁ בְּקִטְנִית וְדָשׁ בִּתְבוּאָה – פָּטוּר, לָדוּשׁ בִּתְבוּאָה וְדָשׁ בְּקִטְנִית – חַיָּיב, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהַקִּטְנִית מַחְלֶקֶת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** With regard to **one who rents a cow** and a plow in order **to plow on the mountain but he plowed in the valley, if the plowshare,** the cutting tool on the bottom part of the plow, **breaks,** he is **exempt,** as it was even more likely to break on mountainous terrain. In a case where he rents the cow and a plow to plow **in the valley but he plowed on the mountain, if the plowshare breaks** he is **liable.** If he hired the cow **to thresh legumes but it threshed grain,** and the cow slipped and broke its leg, he is **exempt.** If he hired it **to thresh grain but it threshed legumes he is liable, because legumes are slippery.**


###### Bava Metzia 80a:2
[Bava Metzia 80a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/80a:2)

**גְּמָ׳** הֵיכָא דְּלָא שַׁנִּי בָּהּ, מַאן מְשַׁלֵּם? אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: דְּנָקֵיט פְּרָשָׁא מְשַׁלֵּם. רַב שִׁישָׁא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב אִידִי אָמַר: דְּנָקֵיט מָנָא מְשַׁלֵּם. וְהִלְכְתָא: דְּנָקֵיט מָנָא מְשַׁלֵּם. וְאִי דּוּכְתָּא דְּמַחְזְקִי (גּוּנְדְּרֵי) – [גְּרוּנְדֵּי] תַּרְוַיְיהוּ מְשַׁלְּמִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The mishna discussed the liability of a renter who diverged from the terms of the rental agreement, but it does not teach the *halakha* of liability for broken machinery in a case where the renter did follow the agreement. The Gemara asks: In a case **where** the renter **did not diverge from** their agreement, **who pays? Rav Pappa said:** The one **who holds the goad [*parasha*] pays,** as it can be assumed that he caused the plow to break by not leading it in a straight path. **Rav Sheisha, son of Rav Idi, said:** The one **who holds the vessel,** the plow itself, **pays. And the *halakha*** is that the one **who holds the vessel pays. And if it was a place** where **rocks are commonly** found **they both pay,** as in this case any small irregularity in the ground where the plow digs a furrow is likely to cause the plow to break.


###### Bava Metzia 80a:3
[Bava Metzia 80a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/80a:3)

אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: הַמּוֹכֵר פָּרָה לַחֲבֵירוֹ, וְאָמַר לוֹ: פָּרָה זוֹ נַגְחָנִית הִיא, נַשְׁכָנִית הִיא, בַּעֲטָנִית הִיא, רַבְצָנִית הִיא, וְהָיָה בָּהּ מוּם אֶחָד וּסְנָפוֹ בֵּין הַמּוּמִין – הֲרֵי זֶה מִקַּח טָעוּת. מוּם זֶה וּמוּם אַחֵר – אֵין זֶה מִקַּח טָעוּת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Rabbi Yoḥanan says,** citing the *Tosefta* (*Bava Batra* 4:6): In a case of **one who sells a cow to another and says to him:** You should know that **this cow** has defects, **it is accustomed to goring, it is accustomed to biting, it is a kicker, it lies down** habitually; **but** in reality **it had** only **one defect and he inserted it among the** list of **defects** that it did not have, **this is a mistaken transaction,** as the buyer saw that it did not have the other defects and therefore did not take seriously any of the defects the seller enumerated, including the one that the cow actually had. But if the seller stated: The animal has **this defect,** i.e., the defect that it in fact has, **and other defects,** without specifying what they were, **this is not a mistaken transaction.**


###### Bava Metzia 80a:4
[Bava Metzia 80a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/80a:4)

תַּנְיָא נָמֵי הָכִי: הַמּוֹכֵר שִׁפְחָה לַחֲבֵירוֹ, וְאָמַר לוֹ: שִׁפְחָה זוֹ שׁוֹטָה הִיא, נִיכְפֵּית הִיא, מְשׁוּעְמֶמֶת הִיא, וְהָיָה בָּהּ מוּם אֶחָד וּסְנָפוֹ בֵּין הַמּוּמִין – הֲרֵי זֶה מִקַּח טָעוּת. מוּם זֶה וּמוּם אַחֵר – אֵין זֶה מִקַּח טָעוּת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara notes that **this is also taught** in a *baraita* (*Tosefta*, *Bava Batra* 4:3): With regard to **one who sells a maidservant to another and says to him: This maidservant is an imbecile, she is epileptic, she is crazy [*meshuamemet*]; but** in reality **she had** only **one defect and he inserted it among the** other **defects, this is a mistaken transaction.** But if the seller stated: The maidservant has **this defect,** i.e., the defect that she in fact has, **and other defects,** without specifying what they were, **this is not a mistaken transaction.**


###### Bava Metzia 80a:5
[Bava Metzia 80a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/80a:5)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב אַחָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרָבָא לְרַב אָשֵׁי: הָיוּ בָּהּ כׇּל הַמּוּמִין הַלָּלוּ, מַהוּ? אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב מָרְדֳּכַי לְרַב אָשֵׁי, הָכִי אָמְרִינַן מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרָבָא: הָיוּ בָּהּ כׇּל הַמּוּמִין הַלָּלוּ – אֵין זֶה מִקַּח טָעוּת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Aḥa, son of Rava, said to Rav Ashi:** If the animal **had all of these defects, what is** the *halakha* in that case? Can the buyer claim to have thought that the seller was not serious when he mentioned so many problems? **Rav Mordekhai said to Rav Ashi: We say this** *halakha* **in the name of Rava:** If the animal **had all of these defects, it is not a mistaken transaction,** as he was forthright. The seller is not at fault if the buyer did not believe him.


###### Bava Metzia 80a:6
[Bava Metzia 80a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/80a:6)

**מַתְנִי׳** הַשּׂוֹכֵר אֶת הַחֲמוֹר לְהָבִיא עָלֶיהָ חִטִּין, וְהֵבִיא עָלֶיהָ שְׂעוֹרִין – חַיָּיב. תְּבוּאָה, וְהֵבִיא עָלֶיהָ תֶּבֶן – חַיָּיב, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהַנֶּפַח קָשֶׁה כְּמַשּׂאוֹי. לְהָבִיא לֶתֶךְ חִטִּין, וְהֵבִיא לֶתֶךְ שְׂעוֹרִין – פָּטוּר. וְאִם מוֹסִיף עַל מַשָּׂאוֹ חַיָּיב. וְכַמָּה יוֹסִיף עַל מַשָּׂאוֹ וִיהֵא חַיָּיב? סוֹמְכוֹס אוֹמֵר מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי מֵאִיר: סְאָה לְגָמָל, שְׁלֹשָׁה קַבִּין לַחֲמוֹר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** With regard to **one who rents a donkey** in order **to bring wheat on it,** to transport it on its back, **and he brought upon it** an identical weight of **barley,** which is lighter than wheat, and the donkey was injured, he is **liable.** Similarly, if he hired it for transporting **grain, and he brought straw** of the same weight **upon it,** he is **liable, because the** extra **volume is as difficult** for the animal **as the load** itself. If he rented a donkey in order **to bring** on it **a *letekh*,** i.e., a measurement of volume, **of wheat, but he brought a *letekh* of barley,** he is **exempt,** as he brought the same volume of a lighter substance. **And** one **who adds to a load** a greater volume than he stipulated is **liable. And how much** must **he add to the load for him to be liable? Sumakhos says in the name of Rabbi Meir: A *se’a* on a camel** and **three *kav* on a donkey.**


###### Bava Metzia 80a:7
[Bava Metzia 80a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/80a:7)

**גְּמָ׳** אִיתְּמַר. אַבָּיֵי אָמַר: ״קָשֶׁה כְּמַשּׂאוֹי״ תְּנַן. רָבָא אָמַר: ״קָשֶׁה לְמַשּׂאוֹי״ תְּנַן. אַבָּיֵי אָמַר: ״קָשֶׁה כְּמַשּׂאוֹי״ תְּנַן, נִפְחָא כִּי תִקְלָא, וְאִי מוֹסִיף שְׁלֹשָׁה קַבִּין – חַיָּיב. רָבָא אָמַר: ״קָשֶׁה לְמַשּׂאוֹי״ תְּנַן, תִּקְלָא כִּי תִקְלָא וְנִפְחָא הָוֵי תּוֹסֶפֶת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** **It was stated** that *amora’im* disagreed about the precise text of this mishna. **Abaye said** that **we learned** in the mishna: **Difficult as the load. Rava said** that **we learned: Difficult for the load.** The Gemara explains: **Abaye said** that **we learned: Difficult as the load,** with the meaning that **volume is like weight, and** therefore when the volume of the two substances is equal, **if one adds three *kav* he is liable. Rava said** that **we learned: Difficult for the load,** with the meaning that if one **weight is like** the other **weight,** then the difference in **volume is** considered **an addition.** In other words, one is liable if the weight of the barley is the same as that of the wheat, in which case the additional volume is considered to cause damage. Rava holds that if the volume of the two is equal, one is not liable for the additional three *kav* of weight.


###### Bava Metzia 80a:8
[Bava Metzia 80a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/80a:8)

תְּנַן: לְהָבִיא לֶתֶךְ חִטִּין, וְהֵבִיא לֶתֶךְ שְׂעוֹרִין – פָּטוּר. וְאִם הוֹסִיף עַל מַשָּׂאוֹ – חַיָּיב. מַאי לָאו שְׁלֹשֶׁת קַבִּין?! לֹא, סְאָה. וְהָא עֲלַהּ קָתָנֵי: וְכַמָּה יוֹסִיף עַל מַשָּׂאוֹ וִיהֵא חַיָּיב? סוֹמְכוֹס אוֹמֵר מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי מֵאִיר: סְאָה לְגָמָל, שְׁלֹשָׁה קַבִּין לַחֲמוֹר!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara attempts to cite a proof for one of these opinions. **We learned** in the mishna: If one hired a donkey **to bring a *letekh* of wheat, but he brought a *letekh* of barley,** he is **exempt. And** one **who adds to a load** a greater volume than he stipulated is **liable. What, is it not** correct that this means he did not bring exactly a *letekh* of barley, but added **three *kav*,** which would support the opinion of Abaye? The Gemara refutes this interpretation: **No,** he added a whole ***se’a*.** The Gemara asks: **But** the continuation of the mishna **was taught concerning this** case: **How much** must **he add to the load for him to be liable? Sumakhos says in the name of Rabbi Meir: A *se’a* on a camel** and **three *kav* on a donkey.**


###### Bava Metzia 80a:9
[Bava Metzia 80a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/80a:9)

הָכִי קָאָמַר: הֵיכָא דְּלָא שַׁנִּי חִטִּין וְהֵבִיא חִטִּין, שְׂעוֹרִין וְהֵבִיא שְׂעוֹרִין, כַּמָּה יוֹסִיף עַל מַשָּׂאוֹ וִיהֵא חַיָּיב? סוֹמְכוֹס אוֹמֵר מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי מֵאִיר: סְאָה לְגָמָל שְׁלֹשָׁה קַבִּין לַחֲמוֹר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains that **this** is what the last clause of the mishna **is saying:** In a case **where** the renter **did not diverge from** their agreement, e.g., they stipulated that he would bring **wheat and he brought wheat,** or **barley and he brought barley, how much** must **he add to the load for him to be liable? Sumakhos says in the name of Rabbi Meir: A *se’a* on a camel** and **three *kav* on a donkey.**


###### Bava Metzia 80a:10
[Bava Metzia 80a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/80a:10)

תָּא שְׁמַע: לְהָבִיא לֶתֶךְ חִטִּין וְהֵבִיא

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara further suggests: **Come** and **hear** a proof from a *baraita*: If one hired a donkey **to bring a *letekh*,** i.e., fifteen *se’a*, **of wheat, but he brought**