Two people are holding a cloak. One says, “I found it” and the other says, “I found it”;

One says “It’s all mine”, and the other says, “It’s all mine”.

One swears that he doesn't own less than half of it, the other one swears that he doesn't own less than half of it, and they split.

One says, “It’s all mine” and the other says, “It’s half mine”.

The one who says, “It’s all mine” swears that he doesn’t own less than ¾ and the one who says “It’s half mine” swears that he doesn’t own less than ¼.

This one takes ¾ and the other one takes ¼.

And what was said, "This one says all of it is mine . . ." is discussing when a seller sold the cloak to one of two people that was found in front of him for a known price and each one of them gave to him the that amount, and he took from one of them willingly and from the second against his will - but he received it from him with the intention that he would return it.

And the seller was unsure which one of them he sold to, and each one of the buyers claimed that he sold it to

me willingly.

And from our principles, that the one who swears, who is taking something with his oath, should not swear about more than he will be allowed to take with that oath, therefore he swears he doesn't he have less than half, he does not swear that all of it belongs to him, since he is only taking half of it. And on all of these laws you can ask and you can judge.

Two people were astride an animal, or one was astride and the other was leading; and one said, “It is all mine”, and the other said “It is all mine”; they each swear that they don’t own less than half of it and they divide it.

If they agree, or if there are witnesses, they can split the animal without an oath.

If someone was astride an animal and saw something lost and said to his fellow, “Give it to me”, and the other took it and said, “I have acquired it”, he has acquired it.

But if after he gave it to him he said, “I acquired it first”, he has said nothing.

If someone saw lost property and fell upon it and someone else came along and took hold of it it, the one that took hold of it acquired it.

If a man saw people running after lost property - a deer with a broken leg, or pigeons that couldn’t fly - and he said, “My field acquires for me”, he has acquired them.

But if the deer was running normally or the pigeons were flying, and he said, “My field acquires for me”, he has said nothing.

Something found by a man’s minor son or daughter, his Canaanite slave or maid, or something found by his wife belongs to him.

Something found by his adult son or daughter, or his Hebrew slave or female slave, or something found by his divorced wife, even if he has not yet given her her ketubah, belongs to them.

If someone found documentation of a debt he should not return them if it recorded a mortgage.

If it did not record a mortgage he may return it, since the court would not enforce from them, according to Rabbi Meir.

But the Sages say: “In either case he should not return them, since the court would enforce from them.”

לא יחזיר – for we are suspicious of collection and conspiracy to fraud and divide the profits. Lest it was a collected/paid off document and it fell from the borrower, and when he admits: “I did not pay,” there is a council of deception between them to seize the sold mortgaged property which cannot be resorted to (in the event of non-payment) and it will be divided between them.

If someone found bills of divorce, or writs of emancipation or wills, or deeds of gifts, or receipts, he should not return them, for I might say, “they were written out, and he might have changed his mind.”

If a man found letters of evaluation, or letters of maintenance, or documents of halitzah or refusal, or documents of arbitration or any document of the court, he should return them

If he found documents in a satchel or bag, or a bundle of documents, he should return them.

And how many are a "bundle" of documents? Three tied up together.

Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says: if one borrowed from three, he should return them to the borrower. But if three borrowed from one, he should return them to the lender.

If someone found a document among his documents and does not know what is its nature, it must be left until Elijah comes.

If there were simfonot [postscripts, codicils, or notes of cancellation] with them, he should do what is stated in their simfonot.

Anything which cancels something is called its simfon, . . . . and Tosafot wrote that in the hand of the lender it is called a simfon and in the hand of the borrower it is called a receipt.

If thou meet thine enemy’s ox or his ass going astray, thou shalt surely return it to him.

Thou shalt not see thy brother’s ox or his sheep driven away, and hide thyself from them; thou shalt return them to thy brother.

And if thy brother be not nigh unto thee, and thou know him not, then thou shalt bring it home to thy house, and it shall be with thee until thy brother seeks it, and thou shalt return it to him.

And so shalt thou do with his ass; and so shalt thou do with his garment; and so shalt thou do with every lost thing of thy brother’s, which he hath lost, and thou hast found; thou mayest not hide thyself.

UNTIL THY BROTHER SEEKS — But would it ever enter your mind that one could give it back before he seeks it?! Rather, thou shalt seek out information from him so that he should not be a fraudulent claimant. (Bava Metzia 27b. 28a; cf. Sifrei Devarim 223:4).

These finds belong to him and these must be announced.

These belong to him: someone found scattered fruit, scattered money, small sheaves in the public domain, cakes of figs, bakers’ loaves, strings of fish, pieces of meat, wool shearings from their country, stalks of flax and strips of purple wool, these are his.

Rabbi Judah says: “Anything which has an alteration, must be announced". How so?

Someone who found a cake with a potsherd in it or a loaf with coins in it.

Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: “Anpuria gear need not be announced.”

Anpuria. New gear that isn't familiar looking, and the owner hasn't gotten used to how they look. This is because sometimes lost items are returned just from recognizing them, for example to a scholar who doesn't lie. These items that are known that their owner's haven't become used to how they look aren't obligated to be announced. The halacha is like Rabbi Shimon son of Elazar.

When? When you find them one by one. However, if you find them two by two, you are obligated to announce, since their number is a marker. Someone who finds something in the street, or a large plaza in a city that has a non-Jewish majority, even if it [the item] has a marker, there is no obligation to announce.

And in a city with a Jewish majority, there is an obligation to announce.

And these must be announced: someone found fruit in a vessel, or an empty vessel; or money in a bag, or an empty bag; piles of fruit or piles of money; three coins one on top of the other; small sheaves in the private domain; home-made loaves of bread; wool shearings as they come from the craftsman’s shop; jugs of wine or jugs of oil, these must be announced.

Someone who found pigeons tied together behind a wall or a fence or on footpaths in the fields may not touch them.

If he found something in a dungheap and it was covered over he may not touch it, but if it was exposed he should take and announce.

If he found in a pile of stones or in an old wall it belongs to him.

If he found it in a new wall in the outer half it belongs to him; in the inner half it belongs to the householder.

If he had hired it out to others, even if a someone found something within the house it belongs to him.

If he found in a shop, it belongs to him.

Between the counter and the shopkeeper, it belongs to the shopkeeper.

In front of the money-changer, it belongs to him.

Between the stool and the money-changer, it belongs to the money-changer.

If a someone bought fruit from his friend or if his friend sent him fruit, and he found coins among them, they belong to him.

If they were tied up he takes and announces.

A garment was also included in all these things (Deut. 22:3). Why was it picked out?

To compare to it: just as a garment is unique in that it has marks and it has those who claim it, so too everything that has marks and has those who claim it must be announced.

For how long must someone announce? Until all of his neighbours know of it, according to Rabbi Meir.

Rabbi Judah says: “For three festivals, and for seven days after the last festival, to allow him three days to go home, three days to return, and one day on which to proclaim.”

Our sages taught: There was a Claimant’s Stone in Jerusalem, and anyone who lost an item would be directed there and anyone who found a lost item would be directed there.

One person would stand and proclaim and the other would stand and provide its distinguishing marks and take.

And that is the place about which we taught (Ta’anit 19a): Go and see if the Claimant’s Stone has been covered over.

“How long does one have to announce it?”.

It was taught: “In the beginning they used to announce for three festivals, and for seven days after the last festival, to allow him three days to go home, three days to return, and one day on which to proclaim.”

After the destruction of the Temple they instituted that one has to announce for three days.

After the danger they instituted that one has to inform his relatives and neighbours and this is enough.

. . . . . And after the Temple was destroyed they instituted that one should announce for 30 days . . .

It was taught: “In the beginning anyone who found a lost object used to announce for three festivals, and for seven days after the last festival, to allow him three days to go home, three days to return, and one day on which to proclaim.”

After the Temple was destroyed, may it be rebuilt speedily in our days, they instituted that they should announce in synagogues and study halls. And after the oppressors proliferated, they instituted that one should inform one's neighbors and acquaintances, and this is enough.

(1) You shall not see your brother's ox or sheep gone astray and ignore them, you must return them to your brother.

(2) If your brother does not live near you and you do not know him, you shall bring it home and it shall remain with you until your brother inquires about it; then you shall

return it to him.

If he said what was lost but could not describe its marks, he should not give it to him.

He should not give to a fraudster even if he does describe its marks, as it is said, “Until your brother inquires about it”, that is to say until you inquire about your brother, whether he is a fraudster or not.

Whatsoever works and eats, let it work and eat. But whatsoever does not work and eat should be sold, as it is said (Deut. 22:2): “You shall return it to him”. See how you return it to him, what shall be with the money [from the sale]?

Rabbi Tarfon says: “He may use it, therefore if it is lost he is responsible for it.”

Rabbi Akiva says: “He may not use it, therefore if it is lost he is not responsible for it.”

If he found scrolls he must read them once every thirty days, and if he does not know how to read he should unroll them.

But he may not learn from them from the beginning, nor may another read with him.

If he found clothing he must shake it out once every thirty days, and spread it out for its own good, but not for his own honour.

Silver or copper vessels - he must use them for their own good but not so as to wear them out.

Vessels of gold or glass - he may not touch them until Elijah comes.

If he found a sack or a large basket or anything that is not generally carried about, he may not carry it.

לא תראה … והתעלמת YOU SHALT NOT SEE … AND IGNORE — “thou shalt not see it, that thou ignore from it”, this is the plain sense of the verse. Our Rabbis, however, said there are times when you may ignore (Sifrei Devarim 225:4).

What is lost property?

If he found an ass or a cow grazing on the path, this does not count as lost property.

An ass with its trappings turned over, or a cow running in the vineyards, this is lost property.

He returned it and it escaped again, and he returned it and it escaped again, even four or five times, he is still obligated to return it, since it is stated (Deut. 22:1): “You shall surely return them”.

If he lost a sela, he may not say to the owner, “Give me a sela”. Rather the owner need only pay him the wages of a labourer.

If there was a court of law in the that place the finder may argue before them.

If there was no court of law, before whom can he argue? His comes first.

If he found it in a stable, he is not obliged to take of it. If he found it in the public domain he is obliged to take care of it.

If it was in a cemetery he need not contract uncleanness because of it.

If his father said to him, “Contract uncleanness”, or if he said to him, “Do not return it”, he should not listen to him.

If he unloaded and reloaded, unloaded and reloaded, even four or five times, he is still obligated, for it is written (Exodus 23:5), “You must surely release with him”.

If the owner went and sat down and said, “The commandment is upon you, if you wish to unload, unload”, he is not obliged, for it is written “with him”. But if the owner was aged or sick, he is obliged.

It is a commandment from the Torah to unload but not to reload. Rabbi Shimon says, “To reload as well.”

Rabbi Yose the Galilean says, “If the beast was carrying more than its proper load he is not obliged, for it is written, “under its load”, a load which it is able to endure.

If thou see the ass of someone who hates you lying under its burden and you don't release it, you shall surely release with him.

But there shall be no destitute among you; for the Lord shall greatly bless thee in the land which the Lord thy God gives thee for an inheritance to possess it:

If a man found his own lost property and his father’s, his own takes priority.

His own and that of his teacher, his own takes priority.

If he found his father’s and his teacher’s, his teacher’s takes priority for his father brought him into the life of this world, but his teacher who taught him wisdom brings him into the life of the world to come.

If his father was weightier than his teacher, his father’s takes priority.

If his father and teacher each were carrying a load, he must first relieve his teacher and afterward relieve his father.

If his father and teacher were each taken captive, he must first ransom his teacher and afterward his father. But if his father was a sage, he must first ransom his father and afterward his teacher.

His lost item comes first. Since the verse says (Deuteronomy 15:4) "Nevertheless, there will be no destitute amongst you", you should be cautious that you don't become destitute.

Know that even if a person explained to him only a single matter from the Mishnah, he is called his teacher. However, he is not obligated to give him precedence or honor him more than his own father, as is mentioned regarding returning a lost object, redeeming a captive, and unloading a burden, unless he is his "distinguished teacher", meaning that most of his

wisdom comes from him.**

And the hint from the Torah that a person must give precedence to himself over others is what the Torah said: ‘Nevertheless, there shall be no destitute among you’ (Deut. 15:4).

It is as if the verse says: You are not obliged to remove harm from another unless doing so will not bring upon you a similar harm to the one you are removing from him.

For if you are in a situation where, by giving the needy person what he lacks, you would become poor like him, you are not obligated to give it. And this is what our Sages said: ‘Your own needs come before those of any other person.’”...

If a man deposits with his neighbour money or vessels to keep, and it be stolen out of the man’s house; if the thief be found, he shall pay double.

If the thief be not found, then the master of the house shall be brought to the judges, to swear that he has not put his hand to his neighbour’s goods.

If a man delivers to his neighbour an ass, or an ox, or a sheep, or any beast, to keep; and it die, or be hurt, or be driven away, no man seeing it: then shall an oath of the Lord be between them both, that he has not put his hand to his neighbour’s goods; and the owner of it shall accept this, and he shall not make it good.

But if it be stolen from him, he shall make restitution to its owner.

Someone deposited an animal or utensils in his fellow’s keeping and they were stolen or lost, and his fellow paid and did not want to take an oath – for they have taught: "an unpaid guardian may take an oath and be exempt" – if the thief is found he must pay twice and if he slaughtered or sold he must pay four or five times.

To whom does he pay? To the person who had guarded the deposited object.

He took an oath and did not want to pay, if the thief is found he must pay twice and if he slaughtered or sold he must pay four or five times.

To whom does he pay? To the owner of the deposited object.

Someone who rented a cow from his fellow and lent it to another, and it died a natural death, must swear that it died a natural death and the borrower must pay the renter.

Rabbi Yose said: “How can this one make business out of that one's cow? Rather, it returns to the owner.”

Someone said to two, “I have robbed one of you of a maneh [100 zuz] and I do not know which of you it is”, or “The father of one of you deposited with me a maneh and I do not know whose father it was”, must give each of them a maneh, since he himself admitted liability.

When a person tells two others, "I robbed one of you" - or "...one of your fathers..." - "of a maneh, but I don't know whom., if he desires to fulfill his moral and spiritual obligation, he must pay the full amount of the robbery to each of the persons. The law, however, requires only that he give the value of the robbery, and they divide it among themselves.
The rationale is that neither of them knows that he has been robbed; it is the robber himself who is notifying them. Our Sages did not impose a penalty in this instance, because no one is lodging a claim.

Two deposited money with a third, one a maneh [100 zuz] and the other 200 zuz.

One says, "The 200 are mine" and the other says, "The 200 are mine".

He gives this one a maneh and this one a maneh and the rest remains until Elijah comes.

Rabbi Yose said: “If so, what does the deceiver lose? Rather, the whole is left until Elijah comes.”

If one gave him 100 and the other 200 in two purses and both claim that the 200 belong to them both should swear and he should give each of them 200, for he sinned in not writing down the names on the purses, and the halakha does not go according to Rabbi Yose.

Similarly, two vessels, one a maneh [100 zuz] and the other 1,000 zuz.

One says, "The more valuable one is mine" and the other says, "The more valuable one is mine".

He gives the less valuable one to one of them and from the value of the more valuable one he gives the value of the lesser one to the other person, and the rest remains until Elijah comes.

Rabbi Yose says: “If so, what does the deceiver lose? Rather, the whole is left until Elijah comes.”

When someone deposits produce with his fellow, even if it should perish he may not touch it.

Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says: “He may sell it before a court of law, since he is like someone who returns a lost object to its owners.”

אבודים – through mice or decay

לא יגע בהן – to see them since each person wants his Kab from the nine Kabim of his fellow. His Kab is beloved to him because he had toiled for it, from the nine Kabim of others that he would purchase with their monetary value if he would sell them.

When someone deposits produce with his fellow, he should return it with deductions.

For wheat and rice, nine half-kabs to the kor [2.5%, there are 180 kav in a kor].

For barley and durra nine kabs to the kor.

For spelt and linseed three seahs to the kor [10%]. All is in proportion to the quantity and according to the time [it is left].

Rabbi Yochanan ben Nuri said: “But what do they care? The mice eat whether there is a lot or a little? Rather, he may exact a reduction from only one kor.

Rabbi Judah says: “If the quantity was great he may not exact any reduction, since the produce increases in bulk.”

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Joḥanan said, why are they called nĕmūšōt, because they come at the end. Abba Shaul used to call them “gropers.” Some formulate in the Mishnah nĕmūšōt, some formulate mĕšūšōt. He who says nĕmūšōt, because they come at the end. Those who say mĕšūšōt, because they grope to come. Rebbi Ḥuna in the name of Menaḥem: Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri used to go out with the second wave of seekers and returned with his needs for the entire year.

With wine he deducts one-sixth (17%). Rabbi Judah says one-fifth (20%).

With oil he deducts 3 logs in 100: 1 ½ logs for sediment and 1 ½ logs for absorption.

If the oil was refined he does not deduct for sediment.

If the jars were old he does not deduct for absorption.

Rabbi Judah says: “If someone sells to his fellow through the year, he accepts a reduction of 1 ½ logs for in 100 for sediment.

Someone a man left a jar [barrel?] with his fellow and the owners did not assign it a special place and he moved it and it broke: if it was broken while he was handling it then, if for his own sake he is liable but if for the sake of the jar, he is not liable.

But if it was broken after he had put it in place, whether he moved it for his own sake or for the sake of the jar, he is exempt.

If the owner had assigned it a special place, and the guardian moved it and it broke: Whether or not it broke while he was handling it or after he had put it in its place: if for his own sake he is liable, if for the sake of the jar, he is not liable.

Someone who left money in his fellow’s keeping and his fellow bound it up and hung it over his back, or delivered it to his son or his daughter who were minors, or locked it up improperly.

He is liable since he did not guard in the way of guardians.

If he guarded it in the way of guardians he is exempt.

If a man left coins with a money-changer: if they were tied up, he may not use them. Therefore, if they were lost, he is not responsible.

If they were loose, he may use them. Therefore, ifthey were lost, he is responsible.

With a householder, whether they were loose or tied up, he may not use them. Therefore, if they were lost he is not responsible.

A shopkeeper is like a householder, according to Rabbi Meir.

Rabbi Judah says a shopkeeper is like a money-changer.

Tzerurin (‘tied up’) means that the coins are bound with an unusual knot, or that he has placed a seal on them. Anything other than this is called mutarin (‘loose’).

When the Mishnah says that the money‑changer is liable for them even if he did not use them, this is because once we permit him to use the coins, he becomes a paid guardian (shomer sakhar) over them. The laws of a paid guardian will be explained later.

But when he actually benefits from them and uses them, then even if they are lost through unavoidable circumstances, he is fully liable, because his obligation becomes like a debt upon him.

And the halakhah follows Rabbi Yehudah.

If a man shall deliver to his neighbour money or vessels to keep, and it be stolen out of the man’s house; if the thief be found, he shall pay double.

If the thief be not found, then the master of the house shall be brought to the judges, to swear that he has not put his hand to his neighbour’s goods.

For all manner of trespass, whether it be for ox, for ass, for sheep, for a garment, or for any manner of lost thing, of which one can say, This is it, the cause of both parties shall come before the judges; and whom the judges shall condemn, he shall pay double to his neighbour.

If someone puts their hand on a deposit: Beyt Shammai say he is charged for what is missing and what is added [when he gives it back].

Beyt Hillel say, "at the time at which he took it out" [from the owner's house, i.e. at the time of the deposit].

Rabbi Akiva says, "at the time when it is claimed".

Someone who expresses his intention to put their hand on a deposit: Beyt Shammai say he is liable and Bet Hillel say he is not liable until he touches it, as it says (Exodus 22:7): “If he had not put his hand onto his neighbor’s property”. How is this so? He tilted the jug and took a quarter-log of wine and the jug was then broken, he only pays the quarter-log.

If he lifted it and then took a quarter-log and the jug was then broken, he pays for the whole jug.

As it is written (Exodus 22:8): “For all manner of trespass" [davar] – from the time that he spoke to misappropriate, he is considered negligent.

Misappropriation does not make one liable for unavoidable accidents until he takes possession by drawing/seizing an object or lift it up which is acquisition.

When you sell something to your neighbor, or buy from your neighbour's hand, you shall not wrong one another.

Silver acquires gold, but gold does not acquire silver.

[Gold acquires silver, but silver does not acquire gold].

Copper acquires silver, but silver does not acquire copper.

Bad coins acquire good coins but good coins do not acquire bad coins.

A blank [unminted coin] acquires a minted coin, but a minted coin does not acquire a blank.

Movable property acquires coin, but coin does not acquire movable property.

This is the general rule: all types of movable property acquire each other.

How? He pulled the produce away from him but did not give him the money, he cannot retract.

He gave the money but did not pull the produce away from him, he may retract.

But they said: “He that punished the generation of the flood will punish someone who does not stand by his word.

Rabbi Shimon says: “He that has the money has the upper hand.”

HALAKHAH: “Silver acquires gold,” etc. This is a principle of the matter: Anything worth less that the other acquires the other.

Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Ashi said:

Who stated this? Rabbi Simeon ben Rebbi. His father told him, change your opinion and state like this: “Gold acquires silver.” He told him, I do not change my opinion since when you were strong you instructed me to state: “Silver acquires gold.”

The word of Rebbi implies that gold is like produce. The Mishnah implies that silver is like produce.

Price-gouging is an overcharge of 4 pieces of silver out of 24 pieces of silver, which make up a sela, 1/6 of the purchase.

Until what time is it permitted to retract? Enough to show to a merchant or to his relative.

Rabbi Tarfon taught in Lod: “Price-gouging is an overcharge of 8 pieces of silver to the seller, ⅓ of the purchase price”, and the merchants of Lod celebrated.

He said to them: “It is permitted to retract all day.” They said, “Let Rabbi Tarfon leave us as we were”, and they reverted to the teaching of the Sages.

When someone buys something which is worth six for five, or something which is worth six for seven, or something which is worth seven for six, all these are sixths and this is called "price-gouging".

There is no distinction between a sixth of money and a sixth in commerce and the buyer and the seller can equally retract on "price-gouging" except that except that the buyer can retract for as long as it takes to show the object to a merchant or to a kinsman whereas the seller can retract after many days. And this is the meaning of the expression “the seller can retract forever” for, because the object is not on his premises, he is not aware of its value until he happens to see something similar and to ascertain its value.

And the halakha does not go according to Rabbi Tarfon.

Price-gouging applies both to the buyer and the seller and, just as it applies to an ordinary person, it applies to a merchant.

Rabbi Judah said: “The law of price-gouging does not apply to the merchant.”

He who has been subjected to it has the upper hand: if he wants he may say to the other, “Give me back my money or give me back the amount you overcharged me.”

How much may be missing from a sela and still be "price-gouging"?Rabbi Meir says: “Four issar, one issar per dinar.”

Rabbi Judah says: “Four pondion, one pondion per dinar.”

Rabbi Shimon says: “Eight pondion, two pondion per dinar.”

Until when is it possible to return it?

In large towns, until he has had time to show it to a money-changer; in villages until the Shabbat evening.

If he recognized it, he should accept it even after twelve months, but [if not] he only has a cause for complaint; and it is permitted to use it for the Second Tithe without anxiety for [someone who won't accept it] is only a cheapskate.

Price-gouging is four pieces of silver, and a claim is two pieces of silver, and an admission of liability is a perutah.

There are five perutahs : an admission of liability is a perutah.

And a woman can be betrothed with something worth a perutah.

And someone who benefits a perutah's worth of hekdesh has committed sacrilege.

And someone who finds something worth a perutah must proclaim it.

And someone who steals something worth a perutah from his fellow and swears to him must go after him even as far as Medea.

There are five fifths: someone who eats terumah, or the terumah taken from the tithe, or the terumah from a tithe taken from doubtfully tithed produce, or hallah, or first fruits, must add a fifth.

Someone who redeems a fourth year plant, or his second tithe, must add a fifth.

Someone who redeems hekdesh must add a fifth.

And someone who derives a perutah’s worth of benefit from hekdesh must add a fifth.

And someone who steals the value of a perutah from his fellow and swears to him must add a fifth.

These are the things to which "price-gouging" does not apply: slaves, debt documents, land and dedications to the Temple.

They are not subject to double or four-times or five-times payment.

An unpaid guardian does not take an oath, nor does a paid guardian pay compensation.

Rabbi Shimon says that holy things for which he is responsible are subject to "price-gouging", and holy things for which he is not responsible are not subject to "price-gouging".

Rabbi Judah says that someone who sells a Torah scroll or an animal or a pearl is not subject to "price-gouging". They said to him: “They only mentioned these.”

You shall not wrong or oppress a stranger, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt.

Just as "gouging" applies to buying and selling, so it applies to words.

One may not say, “How much is this object?", if one does not wish to buy it.

If someone was a "ba'al teshuva", one should not say to him, “Remember your earlier deeds”.

If someone were descended from converts, one should not say to him, “Remember the deeds of your ancestors”, for it is said (Exodus 22:21), “And a stranger you shall not wrong and shall not oppress.”

The tanna who who taught before Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak taught: Anyone who humiliates his fellow in public is like someone guilty of bloodshed.

She [Ima Shalom, sister of Rabban Gamliel] said to him: This I have received from the house of the father's father: All the gates of Heaven are locked, except for the gates of "gouging".

Do not wrong one another, but fear your God; for I am the Lord your God.

Know that ona’atdevarim (verbal gouging) has its own specific verse, namely: “Do not wrong one another, but fear your God”.

The Torah treats this offence more severely than monetary price-gouging, as you can see from the warning about it and the fear of it.

And further, because a person can play tricks with it. For example:

He may stand by an item for sale and say that he wishes to buy it, and then not buy it, saying, “I never intended to purchase it”.

Or he may ask someone who is not knowledgeable in a particular discipline to explain something in order to embarrass him and then say, “I thought he was wise”.

Or he may recount stories that contain disgrace or shame about his fellow, and then claim, “I did not mean what you think”.

About such cases the verse says: ‘You shall fear your God’, for God knows your true intention and what you thought in your heart.

This is the meaning of what our Sages said: “Any matter that is entrusted to the heart is stated with the phrase ‘You shall fear your God.’” And you will find throughout the Torah that whenever “You shall fear” appears, it concerns something that human judges cannot judge.

One may not mix produce with other produce, even new produce with new produce, and needless to say not new with old.

In truth they permitted sharp wine to be mixed with weak wine, since this improves it.

Wine lees may not be mixed with wine, but he may give him the lees that come from the same wine.

Someone whose wine has been mixed with water may not sell it in a store unless he informs him, and never to a merchant even if he has informed him, since it would only be to deceive with it.

In a place where they are accustomed to put water in wine, they may do so.

A merchant may buy from five threshing floors and put the produce into a storage chamber, or from five wine-presses and put into one jug, as long as he doesn’t intend to mix them.

Rabbi Judah says: “A storekeeper should not distribute parched corn or nuts to children, for that accustoms them to come to him”, but the sages permit.

He may not lower the price, but the sages says: “Let him be remembered for good.”

He may not sift crushed beans, according to Abba Shaul, but the sages permit.

They agree that he should not sift them at the entry of the storage chamber, since he would be a "thief of the eye".

He should not beautify what he sells, whether humans, cattle or utensils.

Intend to mix them – to announce that he purchased the majority from a praiseworthy place and to mix in from another place, and his neighbours think that all the produce is from that same place.

If thy brother grow poor, and his means fail with thee; then thou shalt relieve him: though he be a stranger, or a sojourner; that he may live with thee.

Take thou no interest of him, or increase: but fear thy God; that thy brother may live with thee.

Thou shalt not give him thy money on interest, nor lend him thy foodstuffs for increase.

I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Miżrayim, to give you the land of Cana῾an, and to be your God.

If you lend money to My people, to the poor among you, do not act toward them as a "biter"; exact no interest from them.

"Neshech" is called "Ribit". It resembles the bite of a snake: it bites, inflicting a small wound in a person’s foot which he does not feel, but suddenly it swells and distends up to the top of his head. So it is with interest: at first one does not feel it until the interest mounts up and makes the person lose a big fortune (Tanhuma).

What is interest (neshech) and what is increase (tarbit)?

It is interest (neshech) when a man lends a sela for five dinars, or two seahs of wheat for three, because he bites (noshech).

And what is increase? When a man increases produce.

How is this so? Someone bought wheat at a golden dinar [25 silver dinars] for a kor when such was the market price, and then wheat rose to thirty dinars. He said to him, “Give me my wheat since I would sell it and buy wine with the proceeds”.

He said to him, “Let your wheat be reckoned with me at thirty dinars and you now have a claim on me for wine, and he has no wine.

Someone who lends money to his fellow may not dwell in his courtyard for free, nor rent from him at a reduced rate, since that counts as interest.

One may increase rent but not purchase price. How so?

He rented him his courtyard, and said to him, “If you pay me now the cost is 10 selas per year, but if you pay me monthly, the rent is one sela per month”, this is permitted.

If he sold him a field, and said to him, “If you pay me now it is yours for 1,000 zuz, but if you pay me at the time of threshing it will be 12 maneh" [1,200 zuz], it is forbidden.

If a man sold a field, and the buyer gave him part of the price and he said to the buyer, “Pay me the rest of the price whenever you wish and then take what is yours”, this is forbidden.

If a person lent someone money on the security of his field and said to him, “If you do not pay me within three years it will be mine”, then it becomes his. This is what Boethus the son of Zenun used to do with the consent of the Sages.

Until here fixed interest. From this point forward "dust of interest", i.e. a hint of interest [prohibited by rabbinic law, as there is no fixed sum paid].

One may not set up a shopkeeper on receipt of half the profit, or give him the money to buy produce on the condition of receiving half the profit unless he pays him his wage as a labourer.

One may not set up hens or value calves and foals on receipt of half the profit unless he pays him the wage of his labour and his food.

But one may receive the care of calves and foals in return for half the profits, and rear them until they reach a third of their growth, and donkeys until they can carry a burden.

One may value a cow or a donkey and anything that works and eats in order to share the profit.

Where the custom is to share the offspring immediately at birth, they do so; and where the custom is to first rear them, they do so.

Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says: “One may value a calf with its mother, and a foal with its mother. A tenant may offer increased rent in exchange for a loan to improve his field, without fear of interest.

You shall not pay interest to your brother [or, lend at interest to him?] in money or in food or in anything that is payable.

You shall pay interest to a foreigner but you shall not make your brother pay interest, so that that the Lord your God may bless thee in everything that you put your hand to, on the land that you go to to inherit.

לא תשיך is a warning to the borrower that he should not pay interest to the creditor and afterwards (Leviticus 25:37) is the warning to the lender, “you shalt not give him thy money upon interest”.

One may not accept "iron sheep" from an Israelite on “iron terms” because it is interest.

But one may accept "iron sheep" from a non-Jew and borrow money from them and lend them money. The same is true with a "ger toshav" [resident alien].

A Jew may lend the money of a non-Jew with the consent of the non-Jew but not with the consent of an Israelite.

It was taught by Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai, ow do we know that someone who borrows from a maneh from his friend and is not used to saying "hello" to him is then forbidden from saying "hello" to him?" the text says any kind of interest even speech...

We don't trade in produce before the market-price is known.

If he was the first to harvest, he may trade a price with him stacked grain, or for a basket of grapes, or a vat of olives, or over the potter's lumps, or over lime as soon as the limestone is sunk in the kiln.

And he can trade in manure at any time of the year.

Rabbi Yose says: “One may not trade in manure unless the seller has manure on the dungheap.” But the Sages permit.

One may set the price at the highest rate. Rabbi Judah says: “Even if he didn’t set the price he may say, “Give me at this price or give me back my money.”

A person may lend his tenants wheat to be repaid in wheat, if it is for planting but not if it is for food. For Rabban Gamaliel used to lend his tenants wheat at high prices when it later became cheap, and at low prices when it later became expensive, and take back at the cheaper price, not because this was the halakha but because he wanted to be strict on himself.

One should not say to his fellow, “Lend me a kor of wheat and I will repay you at the threshing time”, but he may say, “Lend it to me until my son comes”, or “until I find my key”.

Hillel forbids.

Moreover Hillel used to say, “A woman may not lend a loaf of bread to her neighbour unless she determines its value in money, lest wheat should rise in price and they are taking interest.”

A person may say to his fellow, “Help me weed and I will help you weed” or “Help me hoe and I will help you hoe.”

But he may not say to him, “Help me weed and I will help you hoe”, or “Help me hoe and I will help you weed”.

All days of the dry season are alike, and all days of the rainy season are alike. He may not say to him, “Help me plow in the dry season and I will help you plow in the rainy season.”

Rabban Gamaliel says: “There is interest that is paid in advance and interest that is paid afterward. How is this so?

Someone intended to borrow from another and made him a present and said, “This is so that you will lend to me”, this is interest that is paid in advance.

Someone borrowed from another and repaid it to him, and then sent a present and said, “This is for your money which was idle with me”, this is interest that is paid afterward.

Rabbi Shimon says: “There is interest paid in words: one may not say to his creditor, “Know that such and such a person has come from such and such a place.”

These are the one who transgress a negative commandment: the lender, the borrower, the guarantor, and the witnesses, and the Sages say the scribe too.

They transgress, “You will not give him your money upon interest” (Leviticus 25:37), and

“You shall not take interest from him” (Leviticus 25:36) and

“You shall not be to him as a creditor” (Exodus 22:24), and

“Nor shall you place upon him interest” (ibid.) and

“You shall not put a stumbling block before the blind and you shall fear your God, I am the Lord” (Leviticus 19:14).

If someone hired craftsmen and they deceived each other, they can only grumble.

If someone hired a donkey-driver or a potter [wagon-driver?] to bring litter-bearers or pipers for a bride or for the dead, or workers to take his flax from steeping, or anything that would be lost if delayed, and they retracted, if it was a place where there were no others he may hire others at their expense or he may deceive them.

If someone hired craftsmen and they retracted, they are at a disadvantage.

If the householder retracted he is at a disadvantage.

Whoever changes is at a disadvantage, and anyone who retracts is at a disadvantage.

Someone who hired a donkey to drive it in the hills and drove it in the valley, or in the valley and drove it in the hills, even though each was ten mil [about 10 kilometres], is liable if it died.

If someone hired a donkey and it went blind or was conscripted, he may say to him, “Here is yours before you”.

If it died or was broken, he must provide him with a donkey.

Someone who hired a donkey to drive it in the hills and drove it in the valley is not liable if it slipped but is liable if it overheated.

In the valley and drove it in the hills, he is liable if it slipped but is not liable if it overheated. And if it was due to the altitude he is liable.

Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Whose opinion is this? Rabbi Meir, who said: Anyone who diverges from the intention of the householder is called a robber.

Someone who hired a cow to plow in the hills and plowed in the valley is not liable if the plowshare broke. In the valley and he plowed in the hills is liable if the plowshare broke.

To thresh pulses and he threshed grain, he is not liable.

To thresh grain and he threshed pulses, he is liable, for the pulses are slippery.

Someone who hired a donkey to carry wheat and used it to carried barley, or grain and used it to carry straw is liable, since the bulk is more difficult to carry.

To carry a letech [15 seah] of wheat and it carried a letech of barley he is not liable.

But if he increased its burden, he is liable. What increase in its burden renders him liable? Sommchos says in the name of Rabbi Meir: “One seah for a camel and three kavs [half a seah] for a donkey.”

And if a man borrows something from his neighbour and it breaks or dies, the owner not being with it, he must pay. If the owner is with it, he shall not pay; if he was an employee, it comes with his hire.

All craftsmen are paid guardians.

And all that said, “Take what is yours and bring me the money”, are unpaid guardians.

“Guard for me and I will guard for you”, he is a paid guardian.

“Guard for me”, and the other said “Put it down in front of me”, he is an unpaid guardian.

Some who gave a loan and took a pledge is a paid guardian. Rabbi Judah says: “If he lent him money he is an unpaid guardian; if he lent him fruit he is a paid guardian.” Abba Shaul, “One may rent out a poor man’s pledge to reduce the debt, for he is like one who returns lost property.”

Someone who moved a jar from place to place and broke it, whether a paid or an unpaid guardian, may take an oath [and avoid liability].

Rabbi Eliezer says: “In either case he may take an oath, but I wonder whether in either case the oath is valid.”

Someone who hired workers and told them to start early or to stay late has no right to compel them, where the custom is not to start early or not to stay late.

Somewhere where the custom is to feed them, he feeds them, if to give them sweets [dessert?], he gives - everything goes according to local custom.

It once happened that Rabbi Yochanan ben Mattia said to his son: “Go and hire workers for us”. He went and agreed with them to provide food. When he came to his father, his father said to him, “My son, even if you make them a banquet like Solomon’s in his time you will not have fulfilled your obligation to them. For they are sons of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

Rather, before they begin to work go and say to them, “On condition that you only have bread and pulses.”

Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says: “It wasn't necessary, everything follows local custom.”

In Tiberias one does not work early or late.

In Bet Ma‘on one works early and late.

People from Tiberias who climb up to be hired in Bet Ma‘on are hired on the terms of Bet Maon.

People from Bet Ma‘on who descend to Tiberias are hired on the terms of Tiberias.

But an employer from Tiberias who climbs up to hire workers in Bet Maon can tell them, you should not think that I could not find workers to hire in Tiberias but came up because I heard that you start early and work late.

(In the evening) [Fridays] both early rising and late going is at the employer’s expense. How much? That he may fill an amphora of water, fry himself a fish, and light the candle.

When you come into your neighbour’s vineyard, you eat your fill of grapes; but you shall not put any into your vessel.

You shall not muzzle an ox while it is threshing.

These may eat by the law of the Torah: someone who works on food attached to the ground when the work is finished;

and on food detached from the ground before the work is finished;

and only something which grows from the ground.

And these may not eat: someone who works on food attached to the ground before the work is finished;

and on food detached from the ground after the work is finished;

and something that does not grow from the soil.

Someone who was working with his hands but not with his feet, or with his feet but not with his hands, or even with his shoulder, may still eat.

Rabbi Yose bar Rabbi Judah says, “Only if he works with both his hands and his feet.”

If someone was working with figs he may not eat grapes; if among grapes he may not eat figs, but he may restrain himself until he reaches the best place and eat.

They only said during working time, but because of the principle of "restoring lost property to the owner" they said, that workers may eat as they walk from one furrow to another and as they return from the wine-press, and a donkey while it is unloading.

A laborer may eat cucumbers, even to the value of a dinar, and dates even to the value of a dinar.

Rabbi Elazar Hasama says: “A labourer may not eat more than the value of his wages. And the Sages permit it, but they teach a man not to be a glutton and to close the door in his own face.

Someone may stipulate [not eating] for himself and for his adult son or daughter, and for his Hebrew slave or maid, and for his wife, since these have understanding.

But he may not stipulate for his under-age son and daughter that are not of age, nor for his Canaanite slave or maid, nor for his cattle, since these have no understanding.

Those who possess understanding wil not eat according to what he stipulated with them, even though they are all labourers.

But those who lack understanding will eat, because they do not understand about matter of waiving a right.

And God acquires the food for them in their eating, because a labourer eats by a right granted from Heaven.

Therefore, we have a principle that the Torah granted him the right [to waive eating]; for his wife and children, the Torah didn’t give him the right.

If one hired laborers to work among his fourth-year plantings, they do not eat from them.

If he had not warned them, he redeems and feeds them.

If his fig-cakes broke or his casks opened, or his gourds were cut, they do not eat from them.

If he had not warned them, he tithes and feeds them.

Guardians for produce may eat from it because that is the custom of the land and not because that is the law of the Torah.

There are four kinds of guardians: an unpaid guardian, a borrower, a paid guardian, and a hirer.

An unpaid guardian may always take an oath.

A borrower must always pay.

A paid guardian or a hirer may take an oath if the beast was injured, or taken captive or dead, but he must pay if it was lost or stolen.

When one person gives to another a donkey, an ox, a sheep or any other animal to guard, and it dies or is injured or is carried off, with no witness about,

an oath of the Lord shall decide between the two of them that the one has not laid hands on the property of the other; the owner must acquiesce, and no restitution shall be made.

But if it was stolen, he shall pay its owner.

If it was torn by beasts, he shall bring it as evidence - he shall not pay what has been torn by beasts.

One wolf does not count as "unavoidable" [ones]; two wolves do count as an "unavoidable".

Rabbi Judah says: “When there is a pack of wolves, even one wolf is "unavoidable".”

Two dogs do not count as "unavoidable".

Yadua the Babylonian said in the name of Rabbi Meir says: “From one direction they do not count as "unavoidable", from two directions they count as "unavoidable".

A bandit counts as an "unavoidable".

A lion or a bear or a leopard or a panther or a serpent count as "unavoidable". When? When they come of themselves.

But if he took them to a place of wild animals or bandits they do not count as "unavoidable".

If it died naturally this counts as "unavoidable" [ones, for which a hirer or paid guardian is not liable]; if he afflic it and it died it does not count as "unavoidable".

If it climbed up to the top of a crag and it fell down and died, this does count as "unavoidable"; if they brought it up to the top of a crag and it fell down and died, this does not count as "unavoidable".

An unpaid guardian may specify the condition that he will be exempt from taking an oath, and a borrower to be exempt from paying, and a paid guardian or a hirer from taking an oath or paying.

If anyone makes a condition contrary to what is written in the Torah, the condition is void.

Any condition that mentions first the action is void.

Any condition that can in the end be fulfilled and was laid down as a condition from the beginning, is valid.

The entire Mishnah is of Rabbi Meir, who holds that a person who makes a condition against what is written in the Torah, even in a manner of money, his condition is null/void, and is not the halakha.

But in a manner of money, even after he stipulated against what was written in the Torah, his condition is valid.

(13) When one person borrows from another and it dies or is injured, its owner not being with it, payment must be made.

(14) If its owner was with it, no payment need be made; but if it was hired, it comes with its rental.

Someone who borrowed a cow and borrowed its owner with it, or borrowed a cow and hired its owner with it, or borrowed the owners or hired them, and afterward borrowed the cow, and then it died, is not liable, for it is written, “If its owner was with it no payment need be made” (Exodus 22:14).

But if he first borrowed the cow and afterward borrowed or hired the service of its owner, and the cow died, he is liable, for it is written, “its owner not being with it, payment must be made” (Exodus 22:13).

“Its owner not being with it, payment must be made” – And this is what Scripture teaches us: If the owner is not with it at the time of the borrowing, even if he was with him at the time of breaking a bone or death, he must surely pay.

If someone borrowed a cow, and borrowed it for half a day and hired it for half a day; or borrowed it for one day and hired it for the next; or if he borrowed one cow and hired another if the lender says: “The borrowed one died”, or “On the day it was borrowed it died”, or “At the time it was borrowed it died” and the other one says: “I don’t know”, he is liable.

If the hirer says, “The hired one died”, or “On the day it was hired it died”, and the other says, “I don't know”, he is not liable.

If one says, “The borrowed one”, and the other says, “The hired one”, the hirer must take an oath that the hired one that died.

If one says, “I don't know”, and the other says, “I don't know”, they divide it.

Someone who borrowed a cow and the owner sent it by the hand of his son or his slave or his agent, or by the hand of the the borrower's son or slave or agent, and it died is not liable.

But if the borrower said, “Send it to me by the hand of my son or my slave or my agent, or by the hand of your son or your slave or your agent”, or if the lender said, “I am sending it to you by the hand of my son or my slave or my agent”, or “by the hand of your son or your slave or your agent”, and the borrower said, “Send it”, and he sent it and it died, the borrower is liable.

So too when he returns it.

Someone swapped a cow for a donkey, and it gave birth and similarly if someone sold his slave and she gave birth. One says, “before I sold her”, and the other says, “after I bought her”, they shall divide.

They had two slaves, one large and the other small, or two fields, one large and the other small, If the buyer says, “I bought the large one” and the other says, “I don’t know”, the buyer can rightly claim the large one.

If the seller said, “I sold the small one” and the buyer said, “I do not know”, he may only take the small one. If one said, “It was the large one” and the other said, “It was the small one”, the seller must take an oath that it was the small one that he sold.

If one said, “I do not know”, and the other said, “I do not know”, they shall divide.

If someone sold his olive trees as firewood and they made less than a quarter [log] per seah, this belongs to the owner of the olive trees. If they made more than a quarter [log] per seah, and one said, “My trees produced it”, while the other said, “My land produced it”, they shall divide.

If a flood washed away someone's olive trees and put them in the midst of his neighbour's field, and and one said, “My trees produced it”, while the other said, “My land produced it”, they shall divide.

If a tree was uprooted with the soil, or if a stream swept it away with the soil, if it could have lived it is exempt, if not, it is liable.

Someone who leases a house to his fellow in the rainy season cannot evict him between Sukkot and Pesach. In the summer thirty days.

And in cities, whether during the rainy season or the summer, twelve months.

Shops, whether in cities or small towns, twelve months. Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says: “A baker's or dyer's shop, three years.

Someone who rents a house to his fellow is obligated to provide it with a door, a bolt, a lock and anything which is the work of a craftsman.

However, that which is not the work of a craftsman, the tenant must make himself.

The manure belongs to the owner of the house, and the tenant can only claim what comes from the oven and the stove.

If someone rented a house to his fellow by the year and the year was made a leap year, the extra month goes to the tenant.

If he rented it by the month and the year was made a leap year, the extra month goes to the landlord.

It once happened in Tzippori that a person leased a bath-house from his fellow at “twelve golden dinars a year, one dinar per month”, and the case came before Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel and Rabbi Yose, and they said: “Let them share the extra month.”

The halakha is not in accordance with Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel and Rabbi Yose but whenever the rent is quoted monthly, or even if it is quoted annually, all the benefit goes to the landlord because we have a principle that language is always interpreted minimally and, as land is always assumed to belong to the owner, they ruled that the benefit goes to the landlord whichever way.

Someone who rented a house to his fellow which fell down must put up a new house for him.

If it was small he may not make it large, and if it was large he may not make it small; if it was one, he may not make it two; if it was two, he may not make it one.

He may not reduce or increase the number of windows without both their consent.

If one leased a field from his fellow and the custom of the place was to cut the crops, he must cut them; if the custom was to uproot them, he must uproot them; if the custom was to plough after reaping, he must plough. Everything should follow local custom.

Just as they share the grain, so too they share the chopped straw and the stubble. Just as they share the wine, so too they share the branches and the rods. And both parties must provide the rods.

If one leased a field from his fellow and it was an irrigated or with trees, and the spring dried up or the trees were cut down, he may not give less than his rental.

But if he had said, “Lease me this irrigated field, or this field with trees”, and the spring dried up or the trees were cut down, he may give less than the rental.

Someone who leased a field from his fellow and let it lie fallow - one assesses how much it would have yielded and he gives him, since he said: “If I make it lie fallow and do not till it, I will pay at the best.”

If one leased a field from his fellow and he did not want to weed it, and said to the owner, “What do you care, as long as I pay you the agreed rental?”, one does not listen to him, for the owner can say to him, “Tomorrow you will leave the field and it will grow weeds for me.”

If one leased a field from his fellow and it was not fruitful, if there was enough produce to make a heap, he must still tend to it.

Rabbi Judah says: “What type of measure is a ‘heap’? Rather, if there is enough for dropping [seeding].”

To make a heap. If it is close to two seah [two gallons], he is obligated to engage with it against his will

Someone who leased a field from his fellow, and locusts ate the crop or it was wind-blasted, if it was state-wide may reduce his rent.

If it was not state-wide, he may not reduce his rent.

Rabbi Judah says: “If he had leased it from him for a fixed amount of money, in neither case may he reduce his rent.”

Someone who leased a field from his fellow for ten kors of wheat and it was blasted may pay him out of this crop.

If the wheat were good he may not say, “I will buy you wheat from the market”. Rather, he must pay him from within it [the field].

Someone who leased a field from his fellow to sow barley may not sow wheat; for wheat, he may sow barley.

Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel forbids.

Someone who leased a field from his fellow to sow pulses may not sow grain; for grain, he may sow pulses.

Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel forbids.

Rav Ḥisda said: What is the reason of the ruling of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel? As it is written: “The remnant of Israel shall not do iniquity, nor speak lies, neither shall a deceitful tongue be found in their mouth” (Zephaniah 3:13).

Abaye said: Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel’s reason is from the Master, [Abaye’s teacher, Rabba], as the Master says, "This is someone who wants his land to lay fallow; he should plant wheat one year and barley the next year. And lengthwise one year and crosswise one year."

Someone who leased a field from his fellow for a few years may not sow flax and has no right to the beam of a sycamore.

If he leased it for seven years he may sow flax the first year and he has a right to the beam of the sycamore.

If one leased a field from his fellow for "Seven years for 700 dinar", the Seventh Year is not included in the number.

“A week of years for 700 dinar", the Seventh Year is included in the number.

At his day thou shalt give him his hire, neither shall the sun go down upon it; for he is poor, and sets his heart upon it: lest he cry against thee to the Lord, and it be sin in thee.

Thou shalt not defraud thy neighbour, neither rob him: the wages of him that is hired shall not abide with thee all night until the morning.

One that is hired during the day collects his wages all during the night.

One that is hired during the night collects his wages all during the day.

One that is hired by the hour collects his wages during day or night.

If one was hired by the week, or by the month, or by the year, or by the week of years, if he finished during the day, he collects his wages all during the day and if he finished during the night, he collects his wages during the night and the day.

The hire of a man or of a beast or of gear are all under “You must pay him his wages on the same day” (Deut. 24:15) and “The wages of a laborer shall not remain with you until the morning” (Lev. 19:13).

When is this so? When the employee had claimed it. If he had not claimed it the employer does not transgress.

If he gave him an order to a shopkeeper or moneychanger he does not transgress.

The employee can swear at the set time and take his wages. If the set time passed, he may not swear and take his wages. If witnesses testified that he had claimed, he may swear and receive his wages.

A resident alien is under the law “You must pay him his wages on the same day” but not under, “The wages of a laborer shall not remain with you until the morning”.

When thou dost lend thy neighbour any manner of loan, thou shalt not go into his house to fetch his pledge. Thou shalt stand without, and the man to whom thou dost lend shall bring forth the pledge without unto thee.

And if he be a poor man, thou shalt not sleep with his pledge; thou shalt surely restore to him the pledge when the sun goeth down, that he may sleep in his garment, and bless thee; and it shall be righteousness unto thee before the LORD thy God.

No man shall take the mill or the upper millstone to pledge; for he taketh a man’s life as pledge.

Thou shalt not pervert the justice due to the stranger, or to the fatherless; nor take the widow’s raiment to pledge.

If someone lent to his fellow, he may take a pledge from him only with the permission of a court, and he may not enter his house to take the pledge, as it is states, “You shall stand outside” (Deut. 24:10-11).

If the borrower had two utensils, he may take one but must give back the other. And he must give back the pillow at night and the plow during the day.

And if he dies he need not return the pledge to his heirs.

Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says: “Even to the debtor himself he need only return the pledge within thirty days, and after thirty days he may sell it with the consent of the court.

A pledge may not be taken from a widow, whether she be rich or poor, as it states, “Do not take the a widow’s garment as a pledge” (Deut. 24:17).

If one takes a millstone as a pledge he violates a negative commandment and he is also in violation of both parts, as it states, “Do not take a mill or an upper millstone as a pledge” (Deut. 24:6).

And they didn’t say just an upper or lower millstone but anything that is necessary for food, as it states, “For that would be taking someone’s life as a pledge” (ibid.).

If someone lent to his fellow

and the time arrived and he didn’t pay him back.

If a house and an attic belonging to two fell down, the two of them share in the wood and the stones and the earth.

They consider which stones are likely to have been broken.

If one of them recognizes some of his stones, he takes them and they count as part of his share.

The house belongs to one of them and the attic belongs to the other.

There was a house and an attic of two, the attic broke and the owner of the house did not want to fix it. The resident of the attic may come down below, until he fixes the attic for him.

Rabbi Yose says: “The one below provides the ceiling and the one above the paved flooring.

Someone leases out the upper story that is on top of his house to his fellow and says to him: “the upper story that is on top of this house, I lease to you."

There was a house and an attic of two which fell down, and the owner of the attic told the owner of the house to rebuild and he did not want to, behold, the owner of the attic may rebuild the house and live in it until the other repays him his expenditure.

Rabbi Judah says: “If he is dwelling on his fellow’s property he pays him rent. Rather, the owner of the attic should rebuild both the house and the attic and live in the house until the other repays him his expenditure.”

When it speaks here of "two" it means to say that the essence of the house belonged to one person and the attic to a second one but that one person rented from the other. And the halakha does not go according to Rabbi Yehudah.

So, too, if an olive press was built in a rock and someone else's garden on top of it, and it was broken down, behold, the owner of the garden may come down and sow below until the other rebuilds the ceiling of his olive press.

If a wall or a tree fell into the public domain and caused damage, the owner is not liable to make restitution. If a set time had been given to him to pull down the wall or to prune the tree, and they fell within the time he is not liable, b after that time, he is liable.

Not liable. For what was he to do, as it was an unavoidable accident.

נתנו לו זמן – A Jewish court; thirty days to tear it down and cut it {i.e., the tree) down.

If someone’s wall was next to his fellow’s garden and it fell down and he said to him, “Clear away your stones”, and he answered, “They have become yours”, they do not listen to him.

If, after he accepted, he said him, “Here is your expenditure and I will take back what is mine”, they do not listen to him.

If someone hired a laborer to help him in his work with chopped straw and stubble, and the laborer said to him, “Give me my wages”, and he said to him, “Take as your wages that with which you have labored”, they do not listen to him.

If, after he accepted, he said him, “Here are your wages and I will take what is mine”, they do not listen to him.

Someone who dumps his manure in the public domain: the person who puts it out puts it out, and the person who fertilizes fertilizes.

One may not soak clay in the public domain, nor make bricks.

One may knead clay may be kneaded in the public domain but not bricks.

If someone builds in the public domain: the person who brings the stones brings and the builder builds and if he causes damage, he pays what he has damaged.

Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says: “He may, indeed, make preparation for his work for thirty days.

If there were two gardens one above the other and vegetables between them. Rabbi Meir says: “They belong to the upper one.” Rabbi Judah says: “They belong to the lower one.”

Rabbi Meir said: “If the upper one wished to remove his soil there would be no vegetables.”

Rabbi Judah said: “If the lower one wished wished to fill up his garden with earth there would be no vegetables.

Rabbi Meir said: “Since each is able to thwart the other, we should consider from where these vegetables derive their life.”

Rabbi Shimon said: “Whatever the upper one can take by stretching out his hand belongs to him, and the rest belongs to the lower one.

If two partners wish to make a partition in a courtyard they build the wall in the middle. In a place where the custom is to build of unshaped stones, or of hewn stones, or of half-bricks, or of whole bricks, so they should build it everything is according to local custom.

[If the wall is made of] unshaped stones this one supplies [from his property] three handbreadths, and this one supplies [from his property] three handbreadths. [If the wall is made of] hewn stones this one supplies [from his property] two and a half handbreadths, and this one supplies [from his property] two and a half handbreadths. [If the wall is made of] half-bricks this one supplies [from his property] two handbreadths, and this one supplies [from his property] two handbreadths. [If the wall is made of] whole bricks this one supplies [from his property] one and a half handbreadths, and this one supplies [from his property] one and a half handbreadths.