Bava Metzia 61a

בבא מציעא ס״א ע״א

Learn Bava Metzia 61a step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Bava Metzia 61a in Gemara Clarity

Topic

Sources for every kind of interest, and why the תורה wrote separate לאוין for רבית, גזל and אונאה.

Overview

The ברייתא finishes finding sources that every kind of interest is forbidden. This covers נשך and רבית, money and food, any item at all, and both borrower and lender. רבינא says food-נשך and money-רבית need no special source, because the פסוק in ויקרא places 'נשך ומרבית' between 'money' and 'food'. The גמרא explains that this leaves the ברייתא's גזירה שוה with a different job: carrying 'נשך כל דבר' over to the lender. Then רבא asks why the תורה wrote separate לאוין for רבית, גזל and אונאה. The גמרא first shows that each has a special feature, so none can be learned from just one other. It then shows that גזל can be learned from רבית and אונאה together through their shared feature. So the written לאו of גזל is used for holding back a worker's wages, as a second לאו on top of 'לא תעשק'. Asked why that extra לאו is not applied to רבית or אונאה instead, the גמרא begins answering from the context of the פסוק, and the answer continues on the next עמוד.

Opening lines

The steps (31)

1. ResponseThe extra words 'נשך כסף' teach רבית of money
2. QuestionWhat about the lender?
3. ResponseA shared word links lender to borrower
4. QuestionWhat about other kinds of interest?
5. Response'Interest of anything' covers all items
6. Statementרבינא: no special source is needed
7. ProofHow the verse would have looked if a source were needed
8. ConclusionRead both words with both money and food
9. ChallengeBut the ברייתא itself used a גזירה שוה
10. ResolutionThe גזירה שוה would only be needed without the פסוק's wording
11. QuestionSo what is the גזירה שוה for?
12. ResponseThe גזירה שוה applies the borrower's לאו to the lender
13. QuestionWhy three separate לאוין for רבית, גזל, and אונאה?
14. Responseרבית alone could not teach the others because it is a חידוש
15. ResponseRobbery alone could not teach the others
16. ResponseOvercharging alone could not teach the others
17. ChallengeMaybe one can be learned from the other two
18. ChallengeSuggestion: learn interest from robbery and overcharging
19. RejectionRejected: robbery and overcharging happen without consent
20. ChallengeSuggestion: learn overcharging from robbery and interest
21. RejectionRejected: robbery and interest are not normal buying and selling
22. ChallengeThird try: skip the prohibition of robbery
23. RejectionAnswering the objection that interest is unusual
24. RejectionAnswering the objection that the overcharged victim cannot forgive
25. ConclusionThe common feature teaches robbery
26. QuestionAgreed, so why is the robbery prohibition written?
27. ResponseThe robbery verse forbids withholding a worker's wages
28. ChallengeHolding back a worker's pay already has its own verse
29. ResolutionThe extra verse adds a second prohibition
30. ChallengeWhy not use the extra prohibition for interest or overcharging?
31. ResolutionLearning from the surrounding verses