Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Metzia

Sefaria · Mishnah > Rishonim on Mishnah > Bartenura > Seder Nezikin · 465 sections

3.2.4
והשואל – who is liable for unavoidable accidents , pays the renter, with an oath that he swears to the landlord.
3.2.5
אמר רבי יוסי: כיצד הלה עושה סחורה וכו' – And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yosi.
3.3.1
אמר לשנים: גזלתי לאחד מכם – And they do not make a claim against him at all, but he wants to fulfill [his responsibility] according to heaven.
3.3.2
נותן לזה מנה ולזה מנה – but two who make claim and he admits that the stole from one of them, every one takes an oath that he stole from him. The Sages imposed a fine upon him because he translated on לא תגזול/”you shall not commit robbery” (Leviticus 19:13); and similarly, two who make a claim against one, each one says: “My father deposited with you a Maneh.” And he states: “The father of one of you left with me a Maneh but I do not know which one [of you];” each one of them swore that his father left with him a Maneh, and he gives a Maneh to this one and a Maneh to that one. For he had committed an act of negligence against himself for he should have paid attention and to remember who left with him the Maneh.
3.4.1
שנים שהפקידו אצל אחד זה מנה וזה מאתים – such as the case where both of them deposited together one before the other.
3.4.2
נותן לזה מנה ולזה מנה וכו' – that he said to them: you who were not particular together, and you did not suspect each other, lest his fellow would claim the two-hundred. I also do not deceive myself to be particular about who gets the two-hundred. And they make it as if they placed all three-hundred in one bundle/bag , so they would not have to be particular about what one party has in it and what his fellow has in it.
3.4.3
מה הפסיד הרמאי – for he will never admit the truth.
3.5.1
וכן שני כלים – For the Rabbis, it is necessary for him. For not only this, but also that are taught. Not that it is necessary for one to have a Maneh and the other to have two-hundred Maneh, for there is no loss through the breaking of a utensil, the rabbis said that he should give to this one a Maneh and to that one a Maneh, but even with two utensils where there is loss that it is necessary to break to larger utensil to give from it the monetary value of the smaller one, and when Elijah comes, it is found that the owner of the larger utensil loses when his utensil is broken. And I might think that in this the Sages agree with Rabbi Yosi that everything is left aside until Elijah will come, but it comes to teach us the exact opposite. And the Halakha is like the Sages.
3.6.1
אבודים – through mice or decay
3.6.2
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. And the Rabbis said that he should not touch them, for they have not lost other than up to the diminution that is explicitly mentioned in our Mishnah: for wheat and rice Nine half-Kabim to a Kor, etc. But if they lost more than their diminution [in value], the Sages agree with Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel that they sell them in the Jewish court. And the Halakha is according to the Sages.
3.7.1
המפקיד פירות אצל חבירו – One who deposits produce with his fellow — and the bailee combined them with his own produce and consumed from them, and does not know the measure of what he consumed. When he comes to restore them, he should take out the loss, deducting what they normally deduct.
3.7.2
תשעה חצאי קבין לכור – A Kor = 30 Seah and Seah = 6 Kabim.
3.7.3
הכל לפי הזמן – As such for each and every Kor.
3.7.4
הכל לפי הזמן – for each and every year he should duct for him such-an-amount
3.7.5
מה איכפת להו לעכברים – Such-[an-amount] they eat from a small portion just like from a large portion. Therefore, nine and one-half Kabim per year whether from a Kor or from ten Korim.
3.7.6
אם היתה מדה מרובה – that he deposited with him a lot, from ten korim and upwards, he should take out the losses.
3.7.7
מפני שהן מותירות – for during the days of the granary when they deposit the wheat which is dry, and in the rainy days, when they return it, it blows up. And regarding the consumption by mice, the loss is not so great for each Kor, the mice do not eat all that much from the ten Korim. Therefore, their blowing-up [in the rainy season], restores what the mice consume. And the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehuda nor according to Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri. And all of these measures are [what applies] in the Land of Israel and during the days of the Tannaim, but in other lands at these times, all is dependent upon what the seeds normally lose in that particular country and time.
3.8.1
יוציא לו שתות יין – if he deposited with him wine and it got combined with his, the wine vessel absorbs one-sixth.
3.8.2
רבי יהודה אומר: חומש – since the ground from which they made the wine-vessels in the place of Rabbi Yehuda absorbed one-fifth. And everything is according to the place.
3.8.3
אף המוכר וכו' – Just as they said that there are lees with the depositor , so too they said regarding the seller. For one who sells oil to his fellow and always gives him from his barrels refined oil which is sufficient from him, the purchaser accepts upon himself to deduct from him a log-and-a-half from the walls of the sediment for every one-hundred log. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehuda.
3.9.1
לא יחדו לה הבעלים מקום – in the house of the bailee, to say to him: “lend me this corner.”
3.9.2
לצרכו – to use it
3.9.3
לצרכה – that was in a place that it is close to being broken.
3.9.4
אם משהניחה – that he completed his usage [of it], he placed it in a well-guarded place. Whether he carried it initially for his own needs, whether he carried it for its needs, he is exempt, since we say from he returned it, it is in the owners’ domain as [it was] originally, and concerning it, he is nothing other than an unpaid bailee and is exempt from its unavoidable accidents. And even though he did not inform its owners to say, I took it and returned it. The first part of our Mishnah [is according to] Rabbi Yishmael who said regarding a person who stole a lamb from the flock and [later] returned it to its place, that he is exempt for we do not require the knowledge of the owners. And that which teaches that the owners did not specify a place for it as he returned it to its place after it was used for his needs, that he is exempt, and even though he did not inform the owners, he did return it to its designated/unique place. But even if the owners did not designate a specific/unique place, that when he returned it, it was not to the designated/unique place, he is exempt, for since he returned it to the protected/guarded place, that we did not require the knowledge of the owners.
3.9.5
ובין שהניחה לצרכו חייב – this end [of the Mishnah] is attributed to Rabbi Akiva, who said that a person who steals a lamb from a flock and returned it to its place and it met with an accident, he [i.e., the person who stole it] is always liable, until he informs the owners that he stole [the lamb] and returned [it]. And here also, after he used it for his own needs, and became a thief, regarding it, even though he left it (i.e., the lamb) in a guarded place. And that it is taught at the end [of the Mishnah] , “that the owners designated a particular place, we say that it was not necessary; it was not necessary that they did not designate that he is liable when he placed [the lamb], after he used it for his own needs, for he did not place it in the designated place for it, but even if they (i.e., the owners) designated a place, when he returned and put in its place, he is liable, for we require the knowledge of the owners. And the beginning of the Mishnah is [according to] Rabbi Yishmael and the end of the Mishnah is [according to] Rabbi Akiva. And this is how we establish it in the Gemara.
3.10.1
צררן – in his kerchief/scarf
3.10.2
והפשילן לאחוריו – even though that this is high-level guarding, he is liable, for a person who carries deposited monies from place to place, they lack guarding other than in his hand, as it is written (Deuteronomy 14:24): “Wrap up the money (in your hand) [and take it with you to the place that the LORD your God has chosen].” Even though they are wrapped up, they will be “in your hand.” And if it is in the house, they lack [appropriate] guarding other than in the ground, or in the wall, in the handbreadth closest to the ceiling or the handbreadth closest to the ground. For it is not the manner of thieves to search there. But if he guarded it in another manner, he is negligent and liable, other than if initially, he made a condition with the depositor that for this condition he will accept the deposit, that he would not be liable for all of these forms of guardianship.
3.10.3
לבנו ולבתו הקטנים – but for adults, they take an oath that they guarded in the [appropriate] manner of bailees and are exempt. But we do not say regarding this that a bailee who transferred [the object] to another bailee is liable, for it is the way of a person to entrust what has been deposited in his hand – in the hand of his wife and his children. And all who make a deposit, with the knowledge that when he deposits something, that the one commissioned will give them into the hands of his wife and/or his children.
3.11.1
אם צרורין – and signed, or tied with a distinctive tie
3.11.2
לא ישתמש בהן – but if they are not signed or tied with a distinctive tie, even though they are wrapped, they are as permissible and as if they were not tied at all, and it is permissible to use them.
3.11.3
חייב באחריותן – and even if they were not used, he is [considered] regarding them as a paid bailee, because he is able to use them, and he liable for theft and loss. And if they were used, he is like a lender towards it and he is liable even for unavoidable accidents.
3.11.4
רבי יהודה אמר: כשולחני – and the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yehuda
3.12.1
ילקה בחסר וביתר – from what the deposit is missing and/or how much it increased, such as the case where a person deposited with him a ewe/sheep laden with wool, or pregnant, and it was sheered or it gave birth after he misappropriated it/made illegitimate use of it, he pays for it and for its shorn wool or its offspring, and it results that he is flogged for how much it became [worth] less, or increased, for if it had become pregnant or laden with wool while she was with him, he pays for it as it was laden or pregnant as it is currently, and he is flogged for an increase/addition.
3.12.2
ובית הלל אומרים: כשעת הוצאה – From the house of the owners, and if is laden, it is laden, and if it is bare, bare.
3.12.3
רבי עקיבא אומר כשעת התביעה – as the deposit is (i.e., the condition of the animal) at the time that of its appearance in court, as it is written (Leviticus 5:24): “…He shall pay it to its owner when he realizes his guilt.” He shall give like he is on the day of his guilt, on the day when he is found guilty in court. And the Halakha is according to the School of Hillel.
3.12.4
החושב לשלוח יד בפקדון – he said in in the presence of witnesses, “I will take his the deposit of so-and-so for myself.”
3.12.5
בית שמאי מחייבים – As it is written (Exodus 22:8): “In all charges of misappropriation –[pertaining to an ox, an ass, a sheep, a garment, or any other loss, whereof one party alleges, ‘This is it,’]…” from the time that he spoke to misappropriate, he is considered negligent.
3.12.6
עד שישלח בו יד – As it is written (Exodus 22:7): “…that he has not laid hands on the other’s property.” And this, “In all charges of misappropriation” (Exodus 22:8), the School of Hillel expounds upon this. He says to his servant or to his agent to misappropriate the deposit. Froom when is he liable? There is a teaching in the Scriptural text to intimate, the text reads: “In all charges of misappropriation” (Exodus 22:8).
3.12.7
כיצד? הטה את החבית – Now he explains the words of the School of Hillel, and there are books which don’t read "כיצד"/how? And it is a matter for itself.
3.12.8
ונשברה – after a time
3.12.9
אינו משלם אלא רביעית – 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.
3.12.10
הגביהה ונטל – not exactly took, for when it is lifted up in order to to take [something], he is liable for an unavoidable accident, even if he didn’t take anything from it. But if he took a fourth of a Log (a LOG = 6 eggs in volume) from the barrel, and the rest of the wine in the barrel fermented afterwards, even though he did not lift the barrel up, he pays for all the wine, for he caused the wine to ferment, and it is his act that helped it [get sour] (see Bava Metzia 44a).
4.1.1
הזהב קונה את הכסף – Each thing that is considered to be a coin and currently passing to be given in expenditure (of money), it has the law of coinage. But where it is not considered to be a coin and currently passing, it has the law of merchandise. And his taking possession by drawing towards one’s self the object to be acquired is the establishment of the matter. Therefore, from when one draws [towards oneself] the gold denar, the second has acquired the silver denar in whatever place they are, and neither one of them can retract in this, for the golden denars are [considered] produce in regard to the silver denars.
4.1.2
והכסף אינו קונה את הזהב – since the silver denars are currently passing in expenditure [of money], they have the law of money with regard to golden denars. And if one [of them] pulled the silver denars, the other did not acquire the golden denars, until he pulls [the golden denars], for the money does not purchase, and that is the reason also why cooper acquires the silver, for pennies of copper whose passing is not so important [in the expenditure of money], they are produce in regard to the silver denars, and the silver does not purchase the copper.
4.1.3
מעות הרעות – which became invalidated
4.1.4
אסימון – that was made in the manner of current coinage but it still had not stamped upon it a feature.
4.1.5
כל המיטלטלין קונין זה את זה – if he exchanged these for those, since the one that pulled/drew towards one’s self, the other fellow acquired [the other object]. And this word כל/”all” – includes even a purse filled with money [in exchange] for a purse filled with money.
4.2.1
נתן לו מעות ולא משך ממנו פירות יכול לחזור בו – [both] this one and that one. And it is an ordinance of the Sages, for according to the Written Torah, money does acquire, as we found concerning property dedicated to the Temple, as it is written (Leviticus 27:19): “[and he shall give the money] and it shall pass to him.” And what is the reason that they said that pulling/drawing towards one’s self acquires and not money? It is a decree lest the purchaser leave his acquisition in the seller’s house for long time and a fire spreads in the seller’s neighborhood and he would not be troubled to do what was required to save [what he sold]. Therefore, they placed them in his permission to retract from it (i.e., the sale) if he desired, for since if they increased in value while in his possession, it would increase [in value] and he would retract from the sale and the profit would be his. It is considered by them to be his and he would go to the trouble to save [it].
4.2.2
אבל אמרו מי שפרע וכו' – even though he is able to retract from [the sale]. We curse him in the Jewish court and say about him: He who punished the men of the generation of the Flood and from the generation which witnessed the separation of races (i.e., the Tower of Babel) and from the men of Sodom and Gomorrah and from the Egyptians who drowned in the sea, he will punish him who does not stand by his word (although the court cannot compel him – see Tosefta Bava Metzia 3:14; Talmud Bava Metzia 47b), and afterward he returns to him his money.
4.2.3
רבי שמעון אומר: כל שהכסף בידו ידו על העליונה – Rabbi Shimon is referring to the matter of the First Tanna/teacher [of our Mishnah] who said: “he gave him money, but [the other] did not draw from him towards himself the merchandise – may retract,” whether it is the seller or the purchaser, and Rabbi Shimon comes to say that sometimes the person who has the money in his hand, the seller, who received the money, has the upper hand, and it is in hand to uphold the sale if he wants, but the purchaser cannot retract in it, such as [for example], the attic of the purchaser was lent to the seller, for now if the seller wishes that the sale is upheld, the purchaser cannot retract, even though he has not pulled the object towards himself. And what is the reason why the Rabbis have stated that “pulling” acquires and not money? It is a decree lest the seller will say to the purchaser: “your wheat has burned in the attic;” here where it is the attic of the purchaser, if a fire broke out , he would trouble himself and bring it (i.e., the wheat). But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Shimon, but rather, even though the attic of the purchaser has been lent to the seller, all the while that he has not drawn [the wheat] towards himself, he can retract, whether he is the purchaser or the seller.
4.3.1
האונאה ארבעה כסף – four silver MAOT in which there are six MAOT in a denar, and the SELAH is four denarim.
4.3.2
מעשרים וארבעה כסף לסלע – if the purchase was in SELAH monies which is twenty-four MAOT, for now it would be that overcharging is one-sixth to the purchase, he would be liable to restore to him all of his overcharging [which is] four silver [coins].
4.3.3
עד מתי מותר להחזיר – he who was defrauded, and that the Mishnah used the language of מותר/”permitted” to teach us that it is not possible, for even he who is punished to return the purchase or that he should give him [back] his overcharge.
4.3.4
עד כדי שיראה – the purchase to the traveling merchant or to his relatives. And if he delayed further, he renounced on his overcharging and the seller will always retract, for the purchase is not in his hands that he is would be able to show it to the traveling merchant or to his relatives if he had been overcharged. And if it becomes known that a thing came into his hands like that which is similar to his sale and he knows that he erred and was silent and did not make a claim, he cannot retract and make a claim for he has renounced it.
4.3.5
ושמחו תגרי לוד – who were experts in business and sell at a high price. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Tarfon.
4.4.1
אין אונאה לתגר – because is an expert and without further qualification pardons him, and this that he sold, because it happened by chance another sale. And now, it had been established to retract. Bu the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehuda.
4.4.2
מי שהוטל עליו ידו על העליונה – he who was defrauded.
4.4.3
תן לי מעותי – if the purchaser had been defrauded. And our Mishnah is according to Rabbi Yehuda the Prince. But the Halakha is not according to him, but rather if overcharging is one-sixth, he purchased and returns the overcharged [amount]. If it is greater than one-sixth, the purchase is nullified.
4.5.1
כמה תהא סלע חסרה – current coinage it is always rubbed and is lacking [in its weight]. How much should it be lacking and if one spent it there would be no fraudulent representation (which would invalidate the transaction)?
4.5.2
ארבעה איסרין – for every Sela.
4.5.3
איסר לדינר – and it is one out of twenty-four, for six Me’ah of silver is a Denar, a M’ah is two Pundiyonim and a Pundiyon is two Issarim.
4.5.4
ארבעה פונדיונים – one out of twelve.
4.5.5
שמונה פונדיונים – one-sixth, and such is the Halakha.
4.6.1
בכרכים – where there is a money-changer; until he can show it to the money-changer.
4.6.2
בכפרים – where there is no money-changer.
4.6.3
עד ערבי שבתות – who comes to spend it on Fridays for Sabbath meals, for then he would know if he is able to spend it and receive it (i.e., its equivalent value) from him.
4.6.4
ואם היה מכירה – this is how it should be understood: if he is a righteous individual, and wants to act with equity, if he recognizes that it is the Selah that he gave him, he will accept it from him even after twelve months.
4.6.5
ואין לו עליו אלא תרעומת – this is how it should be understood: and the other who is not a righteous individual and did not want to accept it from him, he has nothing against him other than a complaint/quarrel against him; and he himself who caused him personal loss, in that he did not return it at the appropriate time.
4.6.6
ונותנה למעשר שני – he is speaking of the loss according to the measure of fraud, and he gives it for Second Tithe at its equivalent value, and does not worry because of the uncoined metal which Second Tithe cannot be redeemed for other than a coin which has a form, for it has the name of a coin upon it, and whomever does not take it at its equivalent value as a valid coin, other that something like a piece of silver or gold bar (as opposed to a coined metal), is not other than an evil person.
4.7.1
האונאה ארבעה כסף – for the purchase of a Selah which is a twenty-four silver Ma’ot. It is found that fraud is one-sixth as we have said. And [the Tanna of the Mishnah] repeated it because he had to teach about pleas/claims which are two silver Ma’ot (see Mishnah Shevuot, Chapter 6, Mishnah 1).
4.7.2
הטענה שתי כסף – for there is no oath imposed by the judges on a claim which is less than two silver [M’ah], for his plea is equivalent to two silver M’ah that I have in your hand, and he would admit from them the equivalent of a Perutah/penny, and denies the rest, or he admits to the entire thing and denies a Perutah.
4.7.3
ההודאה שוה פרוטה – to be a partial admission that he would be liable to take an oath.
4.7.4
המוצא שוה פרוטה – but less than this, he is not obligated to announce, as it is written (Deuteronoomy 22:3): “[…and so too shall you do with anything] that your fellow loses [and you find: you must not remain indifferent],” except for a lost object that is not worth the equivalent of a Perutah.
4.7.5
יוליכנו אחריו – if he admit that he swore falsely, for then, he has no atonement until he actually returns it to his hand, and not to the hand of his agent, as it is written (Numbers 5:7): “…giving to him who he has wronged.”
4.8.1
האוכל תרומה – the Great [Priest’s Due] (i.e., 2%). A foreigner (i.e., non-Kohen) who ate the Great Terumah/Priest’s Due.
4.8.2
ותרומת מעשר – a tithe from a tithe (i.e., the gift that the Levite gives to a Kohen – one-tenth of what he receives).
4.8.3
ותורמת מעשר של דמאי – He who purchases grain from an ignoramus, needs to separate the tenth-of-a-tenth, but not the Great Priest’s Due, for everyone was careful with it.
4.8.4
וחלה וביכורים – all of these five are one, and all of them are called “Terumah”/Priest’s Due, and from one denomination they come.
4.8.5
נטע רבעי – he derives "קודש"/”holy” (Leviticus 19:27) from "קודש" /”holy” (Leviticus 27:30) from Second Tithe, that one adds one fifth, and both of them are all considered one thing, since from one Biblical verse they are derived, since they are derived from Second Tithe.
4.8.6
ומעשר שני שלו – exactly, and he adds one-fifth, since it is written (Leviticus 27:31): “[If anyone wishes to redeem] any of his tithes, he must add one fifth to them.”
4.8.7
הקדשו – and not of others, for the word "המקדיש"/”who consecrates (Leviticus 27:19 – “And if he who consecrates the land wishes to redeem it, he must add one-fifth to the sum at which it was assessed, and it shall pass to him.”) is written.
4.8.8
הנהנה – inadvertently, is liable for a sacrifice of sacrilege (i.e., unlawful use of sacred property) and one-fifth.
4.9.1
אלו דברים שאין להם אונאה וכו' – as Scripture states (Leviticus 25:14): “When you sell property to your neighbor, or buy any from your neighbor, [you shall not wrong one another],” a thing that is acquired from hand to hand, excluding land which are not movables, excluding slaves which is juxtaposed to land; excluding documents. As it is written (Leviticus 25:14): “When you sell property…” a thing whose essence is sold and whose essence is bought, excluding documents which do not stand other than for seeing what is in them. Things dedicated to the Sanctuary/Temple, Scripture states, “[you shall not wrong] one another/one’s brother, and not dedicated to the Temple.
4.9.2
לא תשלומי כפל – it is written in the pleading of the claim of the thief (Exodus 22:8): “In all charges of misappropriation” – a generalization; “pertaining to an ox, an ass, etc.,” – a specification; “or any other loss” – he has returned and made a generalization. A generalization, a specification and a generalization, you only judge what is like the specification. Just as the specification is explained as something that is movable and its essence is money, , even all things that are movable and its essence is money. This excludes land which is not movable. This excludes slaves which are juxtaposed to land. This excludes documents even though they are movable, their essence is not money. Dedications to the Temple, Scripture said, “to his neighbor/fellow” (Exodus 22:8); his neighbor/fellow, and not to that which is dedicated to the Temple.
4.9.3
ולא תשלומי ארבעה וחמשה – If a person stole and slaughtered or sold an ox or a sheep dedicated to the Temple, for the four and five-times payment (Exodus 21:37 – “When a man steals an ox or a sheep, and slaughters it or sells it, he shall pay five oxen for the ox, and four sheep for the sheep.”), the All-Merciful stated, and not three-times payment for the sheep and four-times [payment] for the ox, for the since it is excluded from double [payment]. Deduct one from it, for the double [payment] is for someone who slaughters or sells, which are included in the four and five-times payment.
4.9.4
נושא שכר אינו משלם – as it is written (Exodus 22:9): “When a man gives to another…” – generalization; “ “an ass, an ox, a sheep” – a specification; “or any other animal to guard”- a generalization. A generalization, a specification and a generalization, you do not judge other than what is like the specification. Just as the specification is explained as a thing that is movable, etc. Things dedicated to the Temple – Scripture said: “his fellow/neighbor,” and not something dedicated to the Temple.
4.9.5
קדשים שחייב באחריותן – He said, a burnt-offering is upon me and he separated it and it became blemished/defective or he sold it.
4.9.6
יש להם אונאה – for since if it died or it was stolen, he is liable for it [by replacing it], which is his, and we call it (Leviticus 25:14): “you shall not wrong one another.”
4.9.9
מרגלית ובהמה – because a person wants to pair them. Whomever has a nice ox for ploughing will go around after another that is like it [to join it with the other with a yoke] for if he comes to join under a yoke a weak ox with a healthy [one], it would ruin the healthy one, and similarly a nice precious stone to be filled with its partner with gold from the individual [stone]. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehuda nor according to Rabbi Shimon.
4.10.1
כל אונאה בדברים – as it is stated (Leviticus 25:17): “Do not wrong one another, but fear your God; [for I the LORD am Your God],” this is stated with regard to the wrong one does with words, for their goodness nor their evil is not given to be recognized other than in the heart of the person who speaks who knows if for evil he intended them or for good.
4.11.1
אין מערבין פירות בפירות – the house owner who says to his fellow – that the produce of a certain field I am selling to you, he should not mix with them the produce of another field.
4.11.2
ואין צריך לומר חדשים בישנים – He agreed to sell him old [grain], he should not mix with them new [grain], for the old are dry and make more flour than the new.
4.11.3
מפני שמשביחו – the hard improves the soft, therefore, if he agreed with him [to sell him] soft and mixes into it hard, but if he agreed with him [to sell him] hard, he should not mix into it the soft.
4.11.4
אין מערבין שמרי יין – from this barrel with wine from a different barrel.
4.11.5
אבל נותן לו את שמריו – of the wine itself.
4.11.6
לא ימכרנו בחנות – a penny for a penny.
4.11.7
אלא אם כן הודיע – to each one of them that water is mixed in with it.
4.11.8
ולא לתגר – they should not sell them together, and even though they informed him, for he doesn’t take it other than to deceive and to sell it in the store.
4.11.9
מקום שנהגו להטיל מים ביין – and specifically between the vats he can put [water’ for since they practiced thus, there is no error, for all the wines are in the presumption of such.’
4.12.1
התגר נוטל מחמש גרנות – for everyone knows about him that they were not grown in their fields, and that he purchases from many people and with the presumption that they purchase from him [as well].

Bartenura on Mishnah, trans. by Rabbi Robert Alpert, 2020. Via Sefaria (sefaria.org), Sefaria-Export. Version source: http://sefaria.org/ Licence: CC-BY. Source.