Mishnah 1
1)
Among the things that are automatically included in the sale of a ship, as well as the 'Ogin' (anchor), the Mishnah lists the Toren and the Neis. What is ...
... the 'Toren'?
... the 'Neis'?
What does the Tana incorporate, when he adds 've'es Kol ha'Manhigin osah'?
What does he say about the slaves?
He also precludes the Martzufin and the Antiki. What are ...
... the 'Martzufin'?
... the 'Antiki'?
On what condition will all of the above bincluded in the sale?
1)
Among the things that are automatically included in the sale of a ship, as well as the 'Ogin' (anchor), the Mishnah lists ...
... the 'Toren' - the mast, and
... the 'Neis' - the sail.
When the Tana adds 've'es Kol ha'Manhigin osah', he incorporates - the oars.
The slaves, he says - are not included in the sale (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
He also precludes ...
... the 'Martzufin' - the commercial sacks, and
... the 'Antiki' - the goods that the ship is transporting (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
All of the above will be included in the sale however - if the seller stipulates 'Hi ve'Chol Mah she'be'Tochah'.
2)
What will be the Din (vis-a-vis all of the above items)if Reuven gives Shimon the ship as a gift or if he declares it Hekdesh?
In what way are they different than the pit and winepress in the previous Perek (which are automatically included in the gift and in the Hekdesh)?
2)
If Reuven gives Shimon the ship as a gift or if he declares it Hekdesh - the above items are not included in the sale ...
... because, as opposed to the pit and winepress in the previous Perek (which are automatically included in the gift and in the Hekdesh) - they are in no way part of the ship, in the way that the pit and winepress in the previous Perek are in certain respects part of the field.
3)
The Mishnah rules that if Reuven sells Shimon a wagon, the P'rados are not included (See Tos. Yom-Tov). What might the 'P'rados' mean besides the mules that pull the wagon?
What will be the Din in the reverse case?
On what condition are both items sold even in the first case?
3)
The Mishnah rules that if Reuven sells Shimon a wagon, the P'rados are not included (See Tos. Yom-Tov). Besides the mules that pull the wagon, the 'P'rados' might mean - the independent wooden poles that are used to draw it.
And the same applies - in the reverse case (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
Both items will be sold however (even in the first case [See Tos. Yom-Tov) - if they are attached to the wagon at the time of the sale.
4)
In the same vein, the Tana Kama rules that if Reuven sells the yoke ('Tzemed') that binds the oxen together, the oxen are not included in the sale. How about vice-versa?
On what grounds does Rebbi Yehudah disagree?
To illustrate his point, he cites a case where Reuven charges two hundred Zuz for the yoke. What does he prove from there?
4)
In the same vein, the Tana Kama rules that if Reuven sells the yoke ('Tzemed') that binds the oxen together, the oxen are not included in the sale (See Tos. Yom-Tov) - and the same applies in the reverse case (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
Rebbi Yehudah maintains - that the price that Reuven charges Shimon will determine as to whether the one is included in the sale of the other or not.
To illustrate his point, Rebbi Yehudah cites a case where Reuven charges two hundred Zuz for the yoke - which obviously includes the oxen, since everybody knows that the yoke is worth far less than that.
5)
How does the Tana Kama counter Rebbi Yehudah?
How do we reconcile this with the Din of Ona'ah, where the excess of more than a sixth negates the entire sale?
Like whom is the Halachah?
5)
The Tana Kama say counters Rebbi Yehudah by claiming that - 'Ein ha'Damim Re'ayah'.
To reconcile this with the Din of Ona'ah, where the excess of more than a sixth negates the entire sale - we establish the latter where there is a small difference in price, which is subject to error, whereas here, where the difference is vast, it is obvious that the purchaser knows about the difference and he gives the seller the rest in the form of a gift (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
The Halachah is - like the Tana Kama.
Mishnah 2
6)
The Tana Kama and Nachum ha'Madi argue over whether someone who sells a donkey has also sold its accessories. What do they both say about the riding accessories (such as its saddle and saddle-cloth)?
What if they are not actually on it at the time of sale?
Over which kind of accessories are the Tana'im then arguing?
6)
The Tana Kama and Nachum ha'Madi argue over whether someone who sells a donkey has also sold its accessories. They both agree that the riding accessories (such as its saddle and saddle-cloth) - are included in the sale ...
... even if they are not actually on it at the time of sale (See Tos. Yom-Tov) ...
... and the Tana'im are arguing over the sacks and the Martzufin (commercial sacks) that are used for transportation.
7)
The Tana Kama holds that the sacks under discussion are not included in the sale. What if they are on the donkey at the time of the sale?
What does Nachum ha'Madi say?
Rebbi Yehudah makes a sort of compromise. Discussing a donkey with the various sacks on its back, what distinction does he draw between whether Shimon says to Reuven 'Sell me this donkey of yours!' and where he says 'Is this your donkey? Sell it to me!'?
Like whom is the Halachah?
7)
The Tana Kama holds that the sacks under discussion are not included in the sale (See Tos. Yom-Tov) - even if they are on the donkey at the time of the sale.
Nachum ha'Madi says - that they are (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
Rebbi Yehudah makes a sort of compromise. Discussing a donkey with the various sacks on its back, he rules that if Shimon says to Reuven 'Sell me this donkey of yours!' - the sacks are included in the sale; but if says 'Is this your donkey? Sell it to me!' - they are not.
The Halachah is - like the Tana Kama.
Mishnah 3
8)
The Mishnah rules that, if Reuven sells Shimon a donkey, he automatically sells him the Sayach, too. What is a 'Sayach'?
What is the case?
How does that explain the current ruling
Then why, if he sells him a feeding cow, is the calf not also included in the sale?
8)
The Mishnah rules that, if Reuven sells Shimon a donkey, he automatically sells him the Sayach - its baby, too.
The case is - where he agrees to sell him a feeding she-ass.
Consequently, he must have meant to include the baby in the sale - because, of what use is a donkey's milk to him?
On the other hand, if he sells him a feeding cow - the calf is not included in the sale, since we assume that he meant to sell him a cow that provides milk (and not the calf).
9)
What is included in the sale of ...
... a trash-heap?
... a water-pit?
... a beehive?
... a dovecote?
What height or depth constitutes a 'trash-heap'?
The above ruling concerning the water-pit is an individual opinion. What is the Halachah?
9)
Included in the sale of ...
... a trash-heap is - the trash.
... a water-pit is - the water.
... a beehive are - the bees.
... a dovecote are - the doves.
A 'trash-heap' constitutes one that is - three Tefachim tall or deep.
The above ruling concerning the water-pit is an individual opinion. The Halachah is that - the water is not automatically included in the sale.
10)
The Mishnah rules that if Reuven sells Shimon the babies that are born in his dove-cote during the coming year (See Tos. Yom-Tov), the latter must leave Reuven the first B'reichah'. What is a 'B'reichah'?
How many doves does a batch comprise?
Why must he leave it?
10)
The Mishnah rules that if Reuven sells Shimon the babies that are born in his dove-cote during the coming year (See Tos. Yom-Tov), the latter must leave Reuven the first B'reichah' - batch of doves ...
... comprising two birds See Tos. Yom-Tov DH 'Mafri'ach ... ') ...
... which he must leave - to keep their parents company, to prevent them from abandoning the dovecote.
11)
If Reuven sells Shimon the bees that his hive produces during the coming year, how many swarms is Shimon initially permitted to take?
What is the significance of the first three?
The Tana concludes 'u'Mesareis'. What does that mean?
What is the reason for this?
11)
If Reuven sells Shimon the bees that his hive produces during the coming year, Shimon is initially permitted to take - the first three swarms (See Tos. Yom-Tov) ...
... since the earlier swarms are stronger than the later ones (which become progressively weaker).
The Tana concludes 'u'Mesareis', meaning that - he then proceeds to take every second swarm (beginning with the fourth one) ...
... thereby ensuring the continuity of Reuven's beehive (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
12)
The Mishnah now discusses the sale of Reuven's honey-combs (Chalos-D'vash). What comprises honey-combs?
How many Chalos D'vash must Shimon leave Reuven, in the event that the latter sells him all the honey-combs that his hive produces in the forthcoming year?
Why is that?
How many branches must Shimon leave Reuven if the latter sells him the branches of his olive-tree?
12)
The Mishnah now discusses the sale of Reuven's honey-combs (Chalos-D'vash) - comprising the honey and the wax that the bees produce.
In the event that that the latter sells him all the honey-combs that his hive produces in the forthcoming year, Shimon must leave Reuven - two ...
... with which to sustain the bees that remain in Reuven's beehive.
And if Reuven sells Shimon the branches of his olive-tree - Shimon must leave Reuven two branches (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
Mishnah 4
13)
According to the Tana Kama, if Reuven sells Shimon two fruit-trees that are growing on his land, he does not automatically acquire the ground that surrounds them (See Tos. Yom-Tov). What does Rebbi Meir say?
The Tana forbids Reuven to cut down the trees. Why might he want to do that?
Why is it forbidden?
13)
According to the Tana Kama, if Reuven sells Shimon two fruit-trees that are growing on his land, he does not automatically acquire the ground that surrounds them (See Tos. Yom-Tov). Rebbi Meir says that - he does.
The Tana forbids Reuven to cut down the trees - even though the shade causes his land damage ...
... since, precisely because Shimon does not own the land on which his trees are growing, Reuven is Mesha'bed his land for the needs of Shimon's trees as long as they are there.
14)
The Mishnah differentiates between what grows from the Geza and what grows from the roots. What is 'Geza'?
What distinction does the Tana draw between them?
Why can 'the former' not mean that Shimon may allow whatever grows to continue growing?
Then what does he do with it?
What if the trees die and he wants to replace them?
14)
The Mishnah differentiates between what grows from the 'Geza' - the stump of the tree that is above ground, and what grows from the roots (underneath the ground).
The Tana - rules that the former belongs to Shimon (the purchaser), the latter, to Reuven (the seller).
The 'former' cannot mean that Shimon may allow whatever grows to continue growing - in case it grows into a third tree and he will claim that the ground belongs to him (See Tos. Yom-Tov DH 'Lo Yeshapeh').
He must therefore cut it down and may use it as firewood).
If the trees die and he wants to replace them - he is forbidden to do so.
15)
If Reuven sells Shimon three fruit-trees (See Tiferes Yisrael), Shimon acquires the land surrounding them. What status does this give his acquisition?
What are the ramifications of this ruling?
For this Din to come into effect, what is ...
... the minimum space allowed between one tree and the next?
... the maximum space?
What if the space between them is less or more than that?
15)
If Reuven sells Shimon three fruit-trees (See Tiferes Yisrael), Shimon acquires the land surrounding them - since it has the status of a Sadeh Ilan (a field of trees).
The ramifications of this ruling are that - he acquires the ground between the trees and the ground outside them, in that a picker with his basket have the right to use it.
For this Din to come into effect ...
... the minimum space allowed between one tree and the next is - four Amos (See Tos. Yom-Tov DH 'Kanah Karka' ...
... the maximum space - sixteen Amos (Ibid.).
If the space between them is less or more than that - he does not acquire the land.
16)
Who owns whatever grows from the Geza and from the roots?
And what if the trees die?
16)
Whatever grows both from the Geza and from the roots belongs - to Shimon.
And if the trees die - he has the right to replace them with new ones.
Mishnah 5
17)
The Mishnah rules that if Reuven sells Shimon the head of a large animal (e.g. an ox), the legs are not automatically included in the sale. What will be the Din where he sold him the legs? Is the head included?
On what condition will the one be included in the sale of the other?
By the same token, the sale of the Kaneh does not include the liver or vice-versa. What is the 'Kaneh' (in this context)?
How, in both cases, will the Din differ by a small animal (i.e. a sheep)?
17)
The Mishnah rules that if Reuven sells Shimon the head of a large animal (e.g. an ox), the legs are not automatically included in the sale - and vice-versa (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
The one will be included in the sale of the other however - if that is the local custom (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
By the same token, the sale of the Kaneh - the lungs (See Tos. Yom-Tov) does not include the liver, or vice-versa.
In both cases, by a small animal (i.e. a sheep) - the sale of the former will include the latter, but not vice versa (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
Mishnah 6
18)
The Mishnah lists four distinctions in connection with goods that Reuven sells Shimon, with regard to who may and who may not retract. What is the principle that governs all four rulings?
The first of the four distinctions concerns a case where Reuven sells Shimon purportedly good-quality grain and it turns out to be poor-quality. Who is permitted to retract and who is not?
Why might Reuven want to retract?
18)
The Mishnah lists four distinctions in connection with goods that Reuven sells Shimon, with regard to who may and who may not retract. The principle that governs all four rulings is that - whoever has been cheated has the option to retract.
The first of the four distinctions concerns a case where Reuven sells Shimon purportedly good-quality grain and it turns out to be poor-quality (See Tos. Yom-Tov), in which case - Shimon is permitted to retract, but not Reuven.
Reuven might want to retract - if the price of grain rises substantially.
19)
Who is permitted to retract in a case where Reuven believes he is selling Shimon poor-quality grain and it turns to be good-quality,?
Shimon is not permitted to retract. Why might he even want to do so?
What does the Tana say in a case where ...
... the good-quality grain turns out to be good-quality, or the poor-quality grain turns out to be poor-quality?
... purportedly red grain turns out to be white or vice-versa?
What is the reason for the latter ruling?
19)
In a case where Reuven believes he is selling Shimon poor-quality grain and it turns to be good-quality (See Tos. Yom-Tov) - it is Reuven who is permitted to retract.
Shimon is not permitted to retract He may want to do so - if the price of grain drops dramatically.
The Tana rules, in a case where ...
... the good-quality grain turns out to be good-quality, or the poor-quality grain turns out to be poor-quality that - neither can retract (even if the price of grain rises or drops dramatically; whereas in a case where ...
... purportedly red grain turns out to be white or vice-versa - both may retract ...
... because some people prefer red grain, and others, white (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
20)
In the earlier case (where the poor-quality grain turned out to be poor-quality) on what grounds does Shimon claim the right to retract?
Then why did he ask for poor-quality grain in the first place?
What does the Tana finally say in a case where Reuven meant to sell Shimon olive-wood which turned out to be Shikmah-wood, or vinegar which turned out to be wine, or vice-versa?
Why is that?
20)
In the earlier case (where the poor-quality grain turned out to be poor-quality) Shimon claims the right to retract - because he maintains that he really wanted good-quality grain (See also Tos. Yom-Tov) ...
... and he only asked for poor-quality grain - because it is the way of the purchaser to claim that what the seller is selling him is poor-quality.
In a case where Reuven meant to sell Shimon olive-wood which turned out to be Shikmah-wood, or vinegar which turned out to be wine, or vice-versa, the Tana finally rules - that both Reuven and Shimon have the right to retract ...
... because, as we learned in the previous case - some people like the one, whilst others prefer the other.
Mishnah 7
21)
If Reuven sells Shimon fruit, what distinction does the Mishnah draw between whether the latter makes a Meshichah but does not measure it or vice-versa?
Assuming that the fruit is lying in the R'shus ha'Rabim or in Reuven's domain, how does Shimon make Meshichah?
Why is this necessary? Why do Shimon's Keilim not acquire the fruit on his behalf anyway?
The Mishnah is speaking where Reuven did the measuring. What would be the Din if Shimon measured it?
21)
The Mishnah rules that if Reuven sells Shimon fruit, and the latter makes a Meshichah but does not measure it - he acquires it, but not vice-versa.
Assuming that the fruit is lying in the R'shus ha'Rabim or in Reuven's domain, Shimon make Meshichah - by first (See Tos. Yom-Tov) moving it into a Simta (an alleyway) or into a domain that he shares with Reuven.
This is necessary - because otherwise, in the R'shus ha'Rabim, even Shimon's Keilim cannot acquire the fruit on his behalf (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
The Mishnah is speaking where Reuven did the measuring, because if Shimon measured it - he would acquire it with Hagbahah.
22)
What additional condition is required in order to acquire the fruit, even if Shimon did measure it?
Why is that?
22)
However, even if Shimon did measure it, in order to acquire the fruit - they would first need to fix the price (e.g. so much per kilo) ...
... because otherwise - neither of them have faith in the transaction (as Reuven can raise the price as he sees fit and Shimon can say that he only wants it if it is cheap.
23)
If Shimon is smart, how can he acquire the fruit even if it is lying in Reuven's domain?
Why does he not acquire it via Hagbahah by simply picking it up?
What does the Tana mean when, with regard to acquiring a bundle of flax, he writes that Shimon does not acquire it until he moves it from one place to the other?
Then why is it necessary to move it?
23)
If Shimon is smart, he can acquire the fruit even if it is lying in Reuven's domain - by renting the land on which it is lying (See Tos. Yom-Tov), and acquiring the fruit simultaneously.
He does not acquire the fruit via Hagbahah by simply picking it up - because the Mishnah is speaking where it is too heavy to pick up.
When the Tana writes, with regard to acquiring a bundle of flax, that Shimon does not acquire it until he moves it from one place to the other - he means that he acquires it with Hagbahah (See Tos. Yom-Tov) ...
... and he only mentions moving it - because that is what one normally does after acquiring it.
24)
What is the Din in a case where the flax is attached, and Shimon picks a little bit of it?
What is the case?
How does he acquire it?
24)
In a case where the flax is attached, and Shimon picks a little bit of it - he acquires the all the flax.
The case is - where Reuven hires Shimon to improve the field and in the process, to acquire all the flax that is growing in it.
He acquires it - by means of the Chazakah on the land (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
Mishnah 8
25)
If the price of the wine or the oil rises or drops whilst Shimon is purchasing it, until when is it Reuven's gain or loss and when does the gain or loss become Shimon's?
What is the case? To whom does the barrel belong?
What is then the Tana's reason for this ruling?
Where must the Keilim be situated for this Din to be effective?
25)
If the price of the wine or the oil rises or drops whilst Shimon is purchasing it, it is Reuven's loss - until the barrel into which it is being poured is full; after that, it becomes Shimon's.
The case is - where a third person (Levi) lent them the barrel (See Tos. Yom-Tov) for the purpose of the transaction.
Consequently - as long as the barrel is not full, Levi intended to lend it to Reuven (in which the wine or the oil remain his); but once it becomes full, he intended Shimon to use it (in which case it acquires the wine or the oil on his behalf.
For this Din to be effective, the Mishnah must be speaking - where the Keilim are situated - in a Simta or in Shimon's domain.
26)
Who must bear the loss if Shimon's agent is purchasing the wine or the oil on his behalf and it is his barrel, into which he is pouring it, that breaks?
Why might we have otherwise thought that it is Shimon's loss?
26)
If Shimon's agent is purchasing the wine or the oil on his behalf and it is his barrel, into which he is pouring it, that breaks (See Tos. Yom-Tov) - it is the agent who must bear the loss.
We might otherwise have thought that - the agent is his Shali'ach, in which case it would be Shimon's loss, due to the principle 'A person's Shali'ach is like himself' (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
27)
How many drops is Reuven obligated to add after pouring the wine or oil into Shimon's barrel?
What if after that, wine or oil gathers in the vessel from which he is pouring?
In what way is the Din of a storekeeper who is selling wine different?
According to Rebbi Yehudah, when is even a private salesman not obligated to add the three drops?
Like whom is the Halachah?
27)
Reuven is obligated to add - three drops of wine after pouring the wine or oil into Shimon's barrel.
If after that, wine or oil gathers in the vessel from which he is pouring - it belongs to him (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
The Din of a storekeeper who is selling wine is different - inasmuch as he is not obligated to add the three drops.
According to Rebbi Yehudah, even a private salesman is not obligated to do so - on Erev Shabbos shortly before Shabbos comes in.
The Halachah is - like the Tana Kama.
Mishnah 9
28)
The Mishnah now discusses a case where someone gives his young son a Pundiyon to buy an Isar's-worth of oil from a store-keeper, bottle in hand. How many Isrin are there in a Pundiyon?
What happened after the storekeeper measured out the oil and gave it to the child together with the Isar change?
28)
The Mishnah now discusses a case where someone gives his young son a Pundiyon - two Isrin, to buy an Isar's-worth of oil from a store-keeper, bottle in hand.
After the storekeeper measured out the oil and gave it to the child together with the Isar change - the latter smashed the jar of oil and lost the Isar.
29)
On what grounds does the Tana Kama rule that the storekeeper is liable to pay for the oil and the Isar?
Why ought he to be Patur for paying for the bottle?
Then why is he Chayav?
Why is he not Patur, since he returned it to the child?
29)
The Tana Kama rules that the storekeeper is liable to pay for the oil, the Isar and the bottle - because it is obvious that the father was merely informing him of what he wanted, and did not expect him to hand over the oil or the change to the child.
He ought he to be Patur for paying for the bottle however - since, when the father handed the bottle to the child, it is as if he smashed it himself ('Aveidah mi'Da'as').
Nevertheless, he is Chayav - because it speaks where the storekeeper used the bottle to measure out oil for other customers, thereby rendering him liable for whatever happens to it.
Nor is he Patur since he returned it to the child - because returning the article to a child does not exempt him from liability (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
30)
What does Rebbi Yehudah say about the current case?
In what point does he argue with the Tana Kama?
Like whom is the Halachah?
On what condition does the Tana Kama concede that the storekeeper is Patur on the bottle?
30)
Rebbi Yehudah maintains - that the storekeeper is Patur ...
... because if he sent his son to purchase the oil, he must have meant him to do so and to return with the bottle of oil (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
The Halachah is - like the Tana Kama.
The Tana Kama concedes that the storekeeper is Patur on the bottle - if he pours the oil into it without taking it from the child's hands (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
Mishnah 10
31)
According to the Tana Kama, a Siton is obligated to clean his measures once every thirty days. What is a 'Siton'?
Why must he do that?
What does he say about an ordinary Ba'al ha'Bayis? Why is that?
What does Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel say about it?
31)
According to the Tana Kama, a 'Siton' - a wholesaler who purchases from many manufacturers and sells to the shops, is obligated to clean his measures once every thirty days ...
... to remove any trace of wine and oil that may have congealed (and which will otherwise detract from the amount of wine and oil that he sells to his customers).
An ordinary Ba'al ha'Bayis, he says - must do so once in every twelve months, because he does sell as often as a Siton does.
Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel - switches the obligations of the Siton and the Ba'al ha'Bayis (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
32)
A storekeeper has the most stringent Din of all. If he is obligated to clean his measures twice a week, how often must he wipe his ...
... weights?
... scales?
Why is the Din of the storekeeper more stringent than the iton and the Ba'al ha'Bayis?
32)
A storekeeper has the most stringent Din of all. He is obligated to clean his measures twice a week (See Tos. Yom-Tov), and to wipe his ...
... weights - once a week, and his ...
... scales - every time he uses them (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
The Din of the storekeeper more stringent than the Siton and the Ba'al ha'Bayis - because, since he is not obligated to add the three drops (as we learned in Mishnah 8), more wine and oil will be stuck to the barrel.
Mishnah 11
33)
Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel confines the previous rulings to someone who sells liquids. What does he say about someone who sells solids?
To what extent is he obligated to tip the scales in favor of the purchaser for sales...
... that exceed a Litra?
... of less than a Litra?
33)
Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel (See Tos. Yom-Tov) confines the previous rulings to someone who sells liquids. Someone who sells solids - does not need to clean his scales (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
He is obligated to tip the scales in favor of the purchaser for sales ...
... that exceed a Litra (See Tos. Yom-Tov & Tiferes Yisrael) - one Tefach, but for sales of ...
... of less than a Litra - this is not necessary.
34)
In a town where it is not customary to tip the scales, the seller must give his customers Gerumav. What is 'Gerumav'?
The Mishnah gives the Gerumav by liquids as 'one in ten'. What does this mean?
How much must he give them when selling solids?
34)
In a town where it is not customary to tip the scales, he must give his customers 'Gerumav' - a little overweight.
The Mishnah gives the Gerumav when selling them liquids as 'one in ten' - by which he means one tenth of a Litra per ten Litras (one hundredth [See Tos. Yom-Tov]), and ...
... 'one in twenty' (one two hundredth) - when selling them solids.
35)
What does the Mishnah mean when it says that, where the custom is to sell 'be'Dakah', one is not permitted to sell 'be'Gasah'?
Why is that?
Then why is the other way round too prohibited (See also Tiferes Yisrael & Tos. Yom-Tov)?
And what does the Tana finally mean when he says that where it is customary ...
... to flatten the heaped-up pile of goods that is being sold, the seller is forbidden to pile it up?
... to pile them up, it is forbidden to flatten them?
35)
And when the Mishnah says that, where the custom is to sell 'be'Dakah', one is not permitted to sell 'be'Gasah', it means that - where it is customary to measure out the goods that are being sold in small quantities, one is not permitted to measure them in large quantities ...
... because - due to the fact that he only tips the scales once, it causes a loss to the purchaser.
The other way round too is prohibited - because based on reverse logic, it causes a loss to the seller (See also Tiferes Yisrael & Tos. Yom-Tov).
And when the Tana finally says that where it is customary ...
... to flatten the heaped-up pile of goods that is being sold, the seller is forbidden to pile it up, he means - where he charges the seller extra (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
... to pile them up it is forbidden for the seller to flatten them, he means - even if he deducts from the price accordingly.
