Bava Metzia 7
הַשּׂוֹכֵר אֶת הַפּוֹעֲלִים וְאָמַר לָהֶם לְהַשְׁכִּים וּלְהַעֲרִיב, מְקוֹם שֶׁנָּהֲגוּ שֶׁלֹּא לְהַשְׁכִּים וְשֶׁלֹּא לְהַעֲרִיב, אֵינוֹ רַשַּׁאי לְכוֹפָן. מְקוֹם שֶׁנָּהֲגוּ לָזוּן, יָזוּן. לְסַפֵּק בִּמְתִיקָה, יְסַפֵּק. הַכֹּל כְּמִנְהַג הַמְּדִינָה. מַעֲשֶׂה בְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן מַתְיָא שֶׁאָמַר לִבְנוֹ, צֵא שְׂכֹר לָנוּ פוֹעֲלִים. הָלַךְ וּפָסַק לָהֶם מְזוֹנוֹת. וּכְשֶׁבָּא אֵצֶל אָבִיו, אָמַר לוֹ, בְּנִי, אֲפִלּוּ אִם אַתָּה עוֹשֶׂה לָהֶם כִּסְעֻדַּת שְׁלֹמֹה בִשְׁעָתוֹ, לֹא יָצָאתָ יְדֵי חוֹבָתְךָ עִמָּהֶן, שֶׁהֵן בְּנֵי אַבְרָהָם יִצְחָק וְיַעֲקֹב. אֶלָּא עַד שֶׁלֹּא יַתְחִילוּ בַמְּלָאכָה צֵא וֶאֱמֹר לָהֶם, עַל מְנָת שֶׁאֵין לָכֶם עָלַי אֶלָּא פַת וְקִטְנִית בִּלְבַד. רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר, לֹא הָיָה צָרִיךְ לוֹמַר, הַכֹּל כְּמִנְהַג הַמְּדִינָה:
If one hires workers and he tells them to rise early and work till late, in a place where it is not customary to do so, he may not compel them. [Even if he paid them more than other workers, he may not tell them: "I am paying you more on the understanding that you rise early and work late"; for they can tell him: "You are paying us more on the understanding that we are good workers."] Where it is customary to feed them, they are fed. Where it is customary to provide them with seasoning, they are thus provided — all according to the custom of the land. ["all" — to include places where the workers are accustomed to eat and drink in the morning in the employer's house before going out to work. If the employer tells them: "Go out first to work in the field, and I will bring you your food there," they can tell him: "No, we will eat now in the house before going out to work in the field," this being the custom of the land. The Gemara explains that the Mishnah is defective and is to be understood thus: "And if he stipulates to feed them, they receive much food." That is, since he does not have to stipulate this, it being the custom of the land to feed them, and he did stipulate it, the intent is that they are to be fed more than the customary fare. And] once, R. Yochanan b. Mattia said to his son: "Go and hire workers for us." He went and stipulated that they would be fed; and when he came to his father, he said to him: "My son, even if you made for them a meal like that of King Solomon in his time [(i.e., in the time of his reign, for he was both king and non-king)], you would not fulfill your obligation towards them, for they are the children of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. [And the meal of Abraham was larger than that of Solomon. That of Abraham — three bullocks for three men. That of Solomon — (I Kings 4:20): "Judah and Israel, numerous, as the sands on the shore of the sea."] But go and tell them before they start working, [there being only "words" at this point; for once they start working you cannot retract]: 'On condition that you have no claim upon me but for a loaf and pulse alone.'" R. Shimon b. Gamliel says: There was no need to say this, for it is "all according to the custom of the land."
וְאֵלּוּ אוֹכְלִין מִן הַתּוֹרָה. הָעוֹשֶׂה בִמְחֻבָּר לַקַּרְקַע, בִּשְׁעַת גְּמַר מְלָאכָה, וּבְתָלוּשׁ מִן הַקַּרְקַע, עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִגְמְרָה מְלַאכְתּוֹ, בְּדָבָר שֶׁגִּדּוּלוֹ מִן הָאָרֶץ. וְאֵלּוּ שֶׁאֵין אוֹכְלִין. הָעוֹשֶׂה בִמְחֻבָּר לַקַּרְקַע בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁאֵין גְּמַר מְלָאכָה, וּבְתָלוּשׁ מִן הַקַּרְקַע מֵאַחַר שֶׁנִּגְמְרָה מְלַאכְתּוֹ, וּבְדָבָר שֶׁאֵין גִּדּוּלוֹ מִן הָאָרֶץ:
And these [workers] eat [from what they are occupied with] by Torah law: one who is occupied with what is rooted in the ground, at the end of their work [i.e., when they tear it out, viz. Deuteronomy 23:25): "But into your vessel, you shall not place them" — When you are placing them into the owner's vessels you may eat; that is, when they are being torn out.], and [one who is occupied] with what is torn from the ground [may eat that thing] until its labor is completed [for tithing, if it is subject to tithing, or until its labor is completed for challah, if it is subject to challah], (this,) with a thing that grows in the ground. And these do not eat: one who works in what is rooted to the ground, not at the end of the work, and (one who works) in what is torn from the ground after its work has been completed (for tithing or challah), and (one who works) in what does not grow in the ground. [viz. (Deuteronomy 25:4): "You shall not muzzle an ox in its threshing. Its not being written: "You shall not thresh with muzzling" implies that the muzzler is to be likened to the muzzled, and the muzzled to the muzzler, viz.: Just as the muzzled, the ox, eats what is "torn" (from the ground, i.e., the "threshing"), when it works, so the muzzler, the man, eats of what is "torn" when he is working in it; and just as the muzzler, etc. And just as "threshing" is characterized as something which grows in the ground and whose labor is not completed for tithing, and at the end of the work the laborer may eat of it — so, all things which grow in the ground and whose labor has not been completed for tithing may be eaten by the laborer at the end of the work: to exclude a laborer engaged in milking, whipping (milk), or processing cheese, which (products) do not grow in the ground; to exclude a laborer engaged in the separation of dates and figs which are stuck together, their labor having been completed for tithing; and to exclude a laborer engaged in "weeding" garlic and onions, removing the small ones, which will never mature, from the others, to provide more growing space for the large ones, this not being the end of the work. A laborer does not eat all of these and their like.]
הָיָה עוֹשֶׂה בְיָדָיו אֲבָל לֹא בְרַגְלָיו, בְּרַגְלָיו אֲבָל לֹא בְיָדָיו, אֲפִלּוּ בִכְתֵפוֹ, הֲרֵי זֶה אוֹכֵל. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, עַד שֶׁיַּעֲשֶׂה בְיָדָיו וּבְרַגְלָיו:
If one worked with his hands but not with his feet; with his feet but not with his hands; even with his shoulder, he eats. R. Yossi b. R. Yehudah says: (He does not eat) until he works with his hands and his feet. [Just as an ox, with his hands (forelegs) and feet (hind legs), so a man, with his hands and his feet, the muzzler being likened to the muzzled. The halachah is not in accordance with R. Yossi b. R. Yehudah.]
הָיָה עוֹשֶׂה בִתְאֵנִים, לֹא יֹאכַל בַּעֲנָבִים, בַּעֲנָבִים, לֹא יֹאכַל בִּתְאֵנִים. אֲבָל מוֹנֵעַ אֶת עַצְמוֹ עַד שֶׁמַּגִּיעַ לִמְקוֹם הַיָּפוֹת וְאוֹכֵל. וְכֻלָּן לֹא אָמְרוּ אֶלָּא בִשְׁעַת מְלָאכָה, אֲבָל מִשּׁוּם הָשֵׁב אֲבֵדָה לַבְּעָלִים אָמְרוּ, פּוֹעֲלִים אוֹכְלִין בַּהֲלִיכָתָן מֵאֻמָּן לְאֻמָּן, וּבַחֲזִירָתָן מִן הַגַּת, וּבַחֲמוֹר כְּשֶׁהִיא פוֹרָקֶת:
If he were working in figs, he may not eat grapes; in grapes, he may not eat figs. But he may hold back until he reaches the place of the choicest (fruits) and eat (there). And all of these (instances of workers being permitted to eat) were stated (as obtaining) only at the time of working. But by way of "restoring a lost object" to the owners, [i.e., so that he not stop working to eat] they ruled: Workers may eat in going from furrow to furrow. [When they finish one furrow and go to begin another, (they may eat). Even though that time is not "the time of working," the owner prefers that they eat then.], and (they may eat) in returning from the wine press (to pick up another load of grapes). And an ass [may eat from the load on its back while walking] until it is unloaded.
אוֹכֵל פּוֹעֵל קִשּׁוּת אֲפִלּוּ בְדִינָר, וְכוֹתֶבֶת אֲפִלּוּ בְדִינָר. רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר חִסְמָא אוֹמֵר, לֹא יֹאכַל פּוֹעֵל יָתֵר עַל שְׂכָרוֹ. וַחֲכָמִים מַתִּירִין, אֲבָל מְלַמְּדִין אֶת הָאָדָם שֶׁלֹּא יְהֵא רַעַבְתָן וִיהֵא סוֹתֵם אֶת הַפֶּתַח בְּפָנָיו:
A worker may eat a gourd, even if it is worth a dinar; a date, (i.e., dates) even a dinar. R. Eliezer Chisna says: A worker may not eat more than his wage, [it being written (Deuteronomy 23:25): "as your soul" — as (the wages) of his hire, for which he gives his soul, to climb an embankment and to "hang" in a tree.] The sages permit it, but a man (i.e., the worker) is taught not to be a glutton and close the door before him [by way of "good advice." And the first tanna differs with the sages, saying that he is not so advised. The halachah is in accordance with the sages. ("and close the door before him"): i.e., and cause people not to hire him.]
קוֹצֵץ אָדָם עַל יְדֵי עַצְמוֹ, עַל יְדֵי בְנוֹ וּבִתּוֹ הַגְּדוֹלִים, עַל יְדֵי עַבְדּוֹ וְשִׁפְחָתוֹ הַגְּדוֹלִים, עַל יְדֵי אִשְׁתּוֹ, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּהֶן דָּעַת. אֲבָל אֵינוֹ קוֹצֵץ עַל יְדֵי בְנוֹ וּבִתּוֹ הַקְּטַנִּים, וְלֹא עַל יְדֵי עַבְדּוֹ וְשִׁפְחָתוֹ הַקְּטַנִּים, וְלֹא עַל יְדֵי בְהֶמְתּוֹ, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵין בָּהֶן דָּעַת:
One (i.e., a worker) may stipulate [(to take money instead of eating] for himself, for his grown son and daughter, for his grown bondsman and bondswoman, and for his wife, because they have "knowledge," [and they know and waive it]. But he may not stipulate thus for his minor son and daughter, his minor bondsman and bondswoman, and his beast, for they lack "knowledge."
הַשּׂוֹכֵר אֶת הַפּוֹעֲלִים לַעֲשׂוֹת בְּנֶטַע רְבָעִי שֶׁלּוֹ, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ לֹא יֹאכְלוּ. אִם לֹא הוֹדִיעָן, פּוֹדֶה וּמַאֲכִילָן. נִתְפָּרְסוּ עִגּוּלָיו, נִתְפַּתְּחוּ חָבִיּוֹתָיו, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ לֹא יֹאכְלוּ. אִם לֹא הוֹדִיעָן, מְעַשֵּׂר וּמַאֲכִילָן:
If one hires workers to work in his neta revai [(fruits of a tree of the fourth year, which may be eaten only in Jerusalem, or which he may redeem to bring the money to Jerusalem)], they may not eat. If he did not apprise them (that they were neta revai), he redeems them and allows them to eat. If his cakes of figs came loose [and he hired workers to re-form them], or his jugs were opened [and he hired workers to close them], they may not eat thereof, [for their (the fruits') work was completed and they became subject to ma'aser and are tevel (forbidden untithed produce).] If he did not apprise them, he must tithe it and allow them to eat.
שׁוֹמְרֵי פֵרוֹת אוֹכְלִין מֵהִלְכוֹת מְדִינָה, אֲבָל לֹא מִן הַתּוֹרָה. אַרְבָּעָה שׁוֹמְרִין הֵן. שׁוֹמֵר חִנָּם, וְהַשּׁוֹאֵל, נוֹשֵׂא שָׂכָר, וְהַשּׂוֹכֵר. שׁוֹמֵר חִנָּם נִשְׁבָּע עַל הַכֹּל, וְהַשּׁוֹאֵל מְשַׁלֵּם אֶת הַכֹּל, וְנוֹשֵׂא שָׂכָר וְהַשּׂוֹכֵר נִשְׁבָּעִים עַל הַשְּׁבוּרָה וְעַל הַשְּׁבוּיָה וְעַל הַמֵּתָה, וּמְשַׁלְּמִין אֶת הָאֲבֵדָה וְאֶת הַגְּנֵבָה:
Watchers of fruits eat by the law of the land, [this having become the practice], but not by Torah law. [("watchers of fruits":) watchers of pressing vats and (fruit) piles; but watchers of gardens and orchards eat neither by the law of the land nor by Torah law, for a watcher is not like a worker.] There are four watchers: an unpaid watcher, a borrower, a paid watcher, and a hirer. An unpaid watcher swears on everything [i.e., on all things for which other watchers are stated to be liable. He swears that this and this occurred to him, and he is exempt.] A borrower pays for everything [theft, loss, and accident]. A paid watcher and a hirer swear that (a beast was) "broken," or seized, or died (and they are exempt), and they pay for loss and theft. [All are derived from verses in Mishpatim. The first section (Exodus 22:6): "If a man give to his neighbor, etc." speaks of an unpaid watcher, who is not liable for theft and loss. The second (Ibid. 9): "If a man give to his neighbor an ass or an ox or a lamb," speaks of a hired watcher, who is liable for theft and loss, it being written in that regard (Ibid. 11): "And if stolen it will be stolen from him, he shall pay to its owner." This tells me only of theft. Whence do I derive (liability for) loss? From: "If stolen it will be stolen" — in any event (i.e., any manner of loss. What is more, it follows a fortiori, viz.: Now, if he is liable for theft, which is close to being an accident, how much more so for loss, which is close to being dereliction! And a hirer, since the entire benefit is not his, is regarded as a hired watcher. A borrower is spoken of in the third section, viz. (Ibid 13): "And if a man borrow from his neighbor, and it be broken or die, its owner not being with it, pay shall he pay."]
זְאֵב אֶחָד, אֵינוֹ אֹנֶס, שְׁנֵי זְאֵבִים, אֹנֶס. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, בִּשְׁעַת מִשְׁלַחַת זְאֵבִים, אַף זְאֵב אֶחָד אֹנֶס. שְׁנֵי כְלָבִים, אֵינוֹ אֹנֶס. יַדּוּעַ הַבַּבְלִי אוֹמֵר מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי מֵאִיר, מֵרוּחַ אַחַת, אֵינוֹ אֹנֶס, מִשְּׁתֵּי רוּחוֹת, אֹנֶס. הַלִּסְטִים, הֲרֵי זֶה אֹנֶס. הָאֲרִי וְהַדֹּב וְהַנָּמֵר וְהַבַּרְדְּלָס וְהַנָּחָשׁ, הֲרֵי זֶה אֹנֶס. אֵימָתַי, בִּזְמַן שֶׁבָּאוּ מֵאֲלֵיהֶן, אֲבָל אִם הוֹלִיכָן לִמְקוֹם גְּדוּדֵי חַיָּה וְלִסְטִים, אֵינוֹ אֹנֶס:
One wolf is not an oness (an unavoidable "accident") [and a hired watcher and a hirer are liable for it, it being written (Shemoth 22:12): "For the torn beast, he shall not pay" — There is a torn beast for which he pays, and a torn beast for which he does not pay.] R. Yehudah says: In a wolf pack, even one wolf is an oness, [being likely to attack a man.] Two dogs are not an oness. Yadua Habavli says in the name of R. Meir: From one side, they are not an oness; from two sides, they are an oness. [The halacha is neither in accordance with R. Yehudah nor with Yadua Habavli.] One armed robber is an oness. A lion, a bear, a tiger, a leopard, and a snake are an oness. When is this so? When they come of themselves; but if they (the watchers) go to a place where wild animals or armed robbers are found, it is not an oness.
מֵתָה כְדַרְכָּהּ, הֲרֵי זֶה אֹנֶס. סִגְּפָהּ וָמֵתָה, אֵינוֹ אֹנֶס. עָלְתָה לְרָאשֵׁי צוּקִין וְנָפְלָה וָמֵתָה, הֲרֵי זֶה אֹנֶס. הֶעֱלָהּ לְרָאשֵׁי צוּקִין וְנָפְלָה וָמֵתָה, אֵינוֹ אֹנֶס. מַתְנֶה שׁוֹמֵר חִנָּם לִהְיוֹת פָּטוּר מִשְּׁבוּעָה, וְהַשּׁוֹאֵל לִהְיוֹת פָּטוּר מִלְּשַׁלֵּם, נוֹשֵׂא שָׂכָר וְהַשּׂוֹכֵר לִהְיוֹת פְּטוּרִין מִשְּׁבוּעָה וּמִלְּשַׁלֵּם:
If it died naturally, this is an oness. If he afflicted it [by not feeding it, or by leaving it out in the sun in the summertime, or in the cold in the wintertime], and it died, this is not an oness. If it [overpowered him and] went up to a high peak and fell off, this is an oness. If he took it up to a high peak and it fell off and died, this is not an oness. An unpaid watcher may make a condition to exempt himself from an oath; a borrower, to exempt himself from paying; a paid watcher and a hirer, to exempt themselves from an oath and from paying. [And this is not considered making a condition contrary to what is written in the Torah. For he tells him: "I consent to be your watcher only on this and this condition"; and one does not become a watcher until he pulls the beast (to effect acquisition). And this one, when he pulled the beast, had already stipulated that he (the owner) could not impose an oath upon him. He bound himself to be subject only to some of the laws of watchers; and he is liable only for these.]
כָּל הַמַּתְנֶה עַל מַה שֶּׁכָּתוּב בַּתּוֹרָה, תְּנָאוֹ בָטֵל. וְכָל תְּנַאי שֶׁיֵּשׁ מַעֲשֶׂה בִתְחִלָּתוֹ, תְּנָאוֹ בָטֵל. וְכָל שֶׁאֶפְשָׁר לוֹ לְקַיְּמוֹ בְסוֹפוֹ, וְהִתְנָה עָלָיו מִתְּחִלָּתוֹ, תְּנָאוֹ קַיָּם:
If one makes a condition contrary to what is written in the Torah, his condition is void. [This entire Mishnah is in accordance with R. Meir, who holds that if one makes a condition contrary to what is written in the Torah, even in respect to money matters, his condition is void. This is not the halachah. But, in monetary matters, even if one makes a condition contrary to what is written in the Torah, his condition stands.] And every condition preceded by an act is void. [If he prefaced the intended act to the desired condition, e.g., "This is yours, if you do this and this," (the condition is void). For it is not like the condition of the sons of Gad and the sons of Reuven, viz. (Numbers 32:29): "If they pass over … then you shall give, etc." where the condition precedes the act.] And whatever (condition) can be fulfilled at the end, if he stipulates it in the beginning, [the condition being prefaced to the act], the condition stands. [But if it is not possible to fulfill the condition, the condition is void and the act stands. For (in positing this impossible condition), he is only hyperbolizing, not really intending the condition, but only desiring to taunt and goad his neighbor with words.]