Un homme peut prêter à ses métayers du blé contre du blé pour semer, mais pas pour manger. [Il est permis de prêter sa'ah-for-sa'ah à un fermier uniquement lorsqu'il souhaite le semer. Le raisonnement: Dans un endroit où c'est le métayer qui fournit les semences, s'il n'a pas de semences pour semer le champ, le propriétaire le renverra. Et si le fermier emprunte au propriétaire et sème et lui rend (une sa'ah de) blé lorsque le prix du blé a augmenté, ce n'est pas (retour sur) un prêt, mais c'est comme s'il (le fermier) se met à (travailler) maintenant, étant entendu que le propriétaire prend d'abord de la graine de la part qui revient au fermier, et le fermier prend ce qui reste comme rémunération pour son travail, ayant engagé pour travailler sur cette compréhension—qu'il prenne moins que les autres métayers selon la quantité de semence, et il n'y a pas de ribith ici.] Car R. Gamliel prêterait à ses métayers du blé contre le blé pour semer. Qu'il (le blé) soit cher (quand il le prête) et qu'il soit bon marché (lorsqu'il est retourné), ou qu'il soit bon marché (lorsqu'il est prêté) et cher (lorsqu'il est retourné), il leur en prendrait selon le prix le moins cher. Non pas parce que c'est la halakha, mais parce qu'il souhaitait être strict avec lui-même. [Autrement dit, il était nécessaire de présenter cette Mishnah parce que R. Gamliel était rigoureux, reprenant (le blé) au prix le moins cher si le prix baissait. La Michna nous apprend que ce n'est pas la halakha, mais que R. Gamliel a voulu être strict avec lui-même.]
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Metzia
חטין בחטין לזרע – It is permissible to lend to a tenant farmer (who tills the owner’s ground for a certain share in the produce, as opposed to a certain rent in kind/חכיר, irrespective of the yield of the crops) a Seah for a Seah (even though this is normally forbidden) specifically when he wants to sow with them, and the reason for this is that in the place where the tenant farmer is, when he gives the seed, if he didn’t have seed to sow the field, the owner would remove him, and when the tenant farmer borrows from the owner, and he sows [the field], when the wheat go up in price, he gives back wheat, this is not a loan, but rather for the tenant farmer, it is like he goes down into it (i.e., the field) from this moment, on the condition that the owner will take the seed first from the part that will arrive to the tenant farmer, and the tenant farmer will take the rest as the payment for his trouble, and on this condition, he will take less that the other tenant farmers according the measure of the seed, and there is no interest here.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Metzia
Introduction
Mishnayoth eight and nine deal with a person who lends produce in order to receive produce in return. As we have learned previously, if after the loan the value of the type of produce rises, for instance at the time of the loan wheat was 1 dollar a pound and afterwards it was 2 dollars a pound, the borrower will end up returning more value to the lender, which is a form of interest.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Metzia
שהיה רבן גמלאל – that is to say, for this purposes, it was necessary to teach this Mishnah, for Rabbi Gamaliel was more stringent, for if thing became cheaper, he would take according the cheaper set price, and our Mishnah comes to teach us not the Halakha is as such, but rather that he wished to be more stringent upon himself.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Metzia
[A landowner] 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 to be repaid in wheat when it was for planting. And if he lent it when the price was high and it afterward fell, or when it was low and it afterward rose, he used to take wheat back at the lower rate, not because such was the rule but because he wanted to be strict upon himself. A person may not lend another person a seah of wheat on the condition that the other person pay back a seah of wheat. The reason is that if the wheat rises in price after the loan the lender will receive in return more than he gave, and that is considered to be a form of interest. Rather he would have to state an amount, such as 100 dollars worth of wheat and when he gets the loan back he will receive 100 dollars worth of wheat at whatever the rate is at the time of repayment. Our mishnah teaches that although one cannot loan wheat in order to be repaid in wheat when the wheat was intended for eating, one may do so when it is for planting and there is no concern that this be considered interest. The simplest way of understanding this is that it is as if the owner is giving him a better field to work, which he is allowed to do. The second half of the mishnah teaches a stringency that Rabban Gamaliel took upon himself. Although it is permitted to lend wheat for wheat if the wheat is for planting, Rabban Gamaliel would always collect upon the lower rate. In this way there was no potential that he would receive back a higher value than he gave in the beginning and thereby loan with interest.
