Sefer HaChinuch ספר החינוך

To not mistreat in buying and selling: To not mistreat one of Israel — whether male or female — in buying and selling, as it is stated (Leviticus 25:14), “And if you sell a sale to your countryman or buy from the hand of your countryman, a man should not mistreat his brother.” And they, may their memory be blessed, said in Sifra, Behar, Section 3:4, “‘A man should not mistreat his brother’ — that is mistreatment [with] money.” And in the Gemara (Bava Metzia 56b), they, may their memory be blessed, said “‘From the hand of your countryman’ — something that is acquired from a hand to a hand” — that is to say, movable items. And the intention of the Midrash is not that the verse does not warn likewise about lands. Rather the matter is to say that the laws of mistreatment — such as the distinctions that they, may their memory be blessed, said (Bava Metzia 50b) that it is returned if there is [overcharging that is] more than a sixth [above the market price], and its laws for less than a sixth and for a sixth — are not practiced with lands, but only with movable items. And they expounded further about this verse (Sifra, Behar, Section 3:1), “If you have come to purchase, purchase from an Israelite, as it is stated, ‘or buy from the hand of your countryman.’” And perhaps that which they were exacting here that the laws of mistreatment are only with movable items is because the verse changed [its] expression — as it stated, “And if you sell a sale,” which implies any sale, whether land or movable items; and afterwards it designated the warning for movable items, as it stated, “or buy from the hand,” which implies specifically movable items that are acquired from a hand to a hand. They learned from this to say that there is a novel law with movable items which is not with land — and that is the return of money with it in certain cases.

But the essence of the warning — whether with land or whether with movable items — is truthfully that we have been warned not to mistreat the creatures on purpose. However the difference between [movable items and land] is if there is mistreatment (overcharging) with movable items that is more than a sixth, the sale is nullified — as the mind of the creatures does not tolerate more [overcharging] than this with movable items. However it is the way of the creatures to forgive all mistreatment regarding land after one has bought it, since land is something that exists forever. And it is similar to that which they, may their memory be blessed, said by way of exaggeration (Bava Kamma 14b) that land is something worth all money. And the proof to these words of ours — meaning to say, that the prohibition of [overcharging] is also with land — is that behold, the main warning is written about lands, as is explained in this section of the Torah. And that is the opinion of Ramban regarding this — and as he wrote in his commentary of the Pentateuch (Ramban on Leviticus 25:14).

The root of the commandment is well-known, as it is something to which the intellect testifies. And if it were not written, it is appropriate that it would be written — as it is not fitting to take the money of people through falsehood and deceit. Rather, everyone should earn that which God has granted him through his toil, in truth and righteousness. And there is a benefit to each and every one with this thing; such that [just] like he will not mistreat others, others will also not mistreat him. And even if there be one who knows how to trick more than other people [do], maybe his children will not be so and people will deceive them. And [so] it comes out that the things are the same for all, and that it is of great benefit for the inhabitation of the world. And God, blessed be He, created it to be inhabited.

From the laws of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Bava Metzia 51a) that both the buyer and the purchaser are warned by this warning (commandment), as it is stated, “And if you sell a sale to your countryman or buy.” And the buyer should not say, “It is the way of the seller to know the worth of his sale. And given that he sold it to me for a little money, I do not have an iniquity [for buying it below its fair price].” As it is not like this, but they are rather both [included] in the warning. And likewise both of them are [included] in the laws of mistreatments, in the manner that they, may their memory be blessed, differentiated [the laws]. And so is it in the Mishnah (Bava Metzia 51a), “It is the same for the seller and the buyer that they have [the law of] mistreatment. And anyone that is [overcharged] is able to renege on [the sale].” And they, may their memory be blessed, said (Bava Metzia 49b) that the measure of [overpricing] that we return [the extra amount] but the sale will stand is a sixth of the sold item or a sixth of the money; and the measure of [overcharging] that we do not even return it — and it is not necessary to say that we do not nullify the sale for it — is less than a sixth of the sold item or of the money, but if there was a sixth of one of them in the thing, [the extra amount] is returned; and the measure of [overcharging] for which the entire purchase is nullified is so long as it is more than a sixth of the purchase or the money. As the law is like Shmuel, who says in the Gemara (Bava Metzia 49b) that if the [overcharging] is not greater than either of them, the sale is not nullified, but he rather returns the [extra amount].

And that which we said that with [overcharging] that is more than a sixth, the sale is nullified — and even though this one went [back] to his house with his money, and this one went to his house with his produce — [that is] only if the one that was mistreated comes to renege on it. But if the one who mistreated comes to renege on it, because the produce had appreciated in between or [because of] another claim, we do not listen to him. [This is] because the one mistreated [could] say to him, “If you had not [overcharged] me, you would not have been able to go back on it; and now you have found that you want to go back on it?” And so is the language of the Gemara (Bava Batra 84a), and Rav Chisda is the one who said the teaching in the chapter [entitled] Hasefinah; and Rabbi Alfas, may his memory be blessed, ruled [like] it regarding the nullification of a sale and of produce. [This is] meaning to say, that the one mistreated is saying to the one who mistreated, “At the time of the sale, the [extra] profit was already with you, and our sale or purchase was already standing because of you. What is it that comes to nullify it? The mistreatment that you did to me. Behold, I forgive it.” As our Rabbis only nullified the acquisition because of the one mistreated. From when he wants the preservation of the [sale], behold, it is preserved. And that is [the meaning of that] which we learned (Bava Batra 83b), “Fine, and they were found to be inferior, the buyer can renege on it” — meaning to say, but not the seller; “Inferior and they were found to be fine, the seller can renege on it” — meaning to say, but not the buyer.

And they, may their memory be blessed, said (Bava Metzia 52a) about the matter of [overcharging] that it is not fitting that the law of reneging or nullification be forever; but they rather gave a set time about the things, so that the matters of buying and selling among people be preserved. And the time that they gave is not the same for all things and is also not the same for the buyer and the seller: As with any trade that [involves] the exchange of coins, they gave the measure [of time sufficient] for the buyer to show it to the money-changer if he is in the city. But if he is in a village, the measure is until the market day, that he can bring it to the city or to the place where the money-changer is [found]. And with all other goods there is no difference between a village and a city — and the measure for them is [time sufficient] for a person to show what he bought to a trader or to his relative. And this measure is according to what the eyes of the judge see; as it is impossible to set a calculation of hours about this matter. And Rava gave a reason in the Gemara (Bava Metzia 52b) about the distinction of a coin from other goods, and said it more generally, “Everyone is certain about a cloak, it is [only] a money-changer who is certain about a sela. If this time passed and the buyer did not renege on it, he may not legally renege on it — even if there is much more than a sixth of [overpayment]. However, the Sages said (Bava Metzia 52b) that it is fitting from the trait of piety to always [allow him] to renege on it. And these measures are for the buyer, but the seller can always renege on it; since the goods are not in his hand so that he can confer about them.

And these laws that we wrote are only said about one who purchased from a trader. But [regarding] one who buys from a homeowner, there is no [overcharging] in it and no nullification of the sale within the set time that we said nor afterwards. As these things were only said with traders for the improvement of the world and the settlement of the states. But homeowners only sell expensively — and in their knowing the matter that it is like this, people always forgive the matter with a homeowner. And these are the things (Bava Metzia 56a) that do not have the laws of [overcharging] for anyone, and even if they were sold for twice their worth — and even though there is a prohibition of [overcharging] about them, according to the opinion of Ramban, may his memory be blessed: lands; slaves — since they were compared to lands, as is learned in the Gemara (Bava Metzia 56b), from that which it is written (Leviticus 25:46), “And you shall inherit them”; deeds; and consecrated properties. And [it is] as they, may their memory be blessed, said, “‘And if you sell, etc. or buy from the hand’ — something that is acquired from a hand to a hand; [so] lands are excluded, as they are not movable items. Slaves are excluded, as they are compared to lands. Deeds are excluded, as Scripture stated, ‘a sale’ — that which it, itself, is sold; [so] deeds are excluded, as they are not sold themselves and they are not acquired themselves, but only for the proof in them. From here they said, one who sells his deeds to a perfumer has [the possibility of overcharging].” And the reason is because they do not sell it to him for the proof in them, but rather to use the paper. And it wonders about this in the Gemara, “What do we understand from it?” — meaning, isn’t this obvious; is paper worse than any other thing? And it answers, “To exclude from that of Rav Kahana, as he says, ‘There is no [overcharging] for perutot (the smallest coins) [and things of similar value].’” Consecrated property is excluded from the law of overcharging, from that which it is written, “your countryman.”

And know that all of the matters of [overcharging] are said regarding the worth of an object, such as if he sold what is worth six for five or what is worth five for six. But one who [defrauds] about the measure of an object — in its length, width or thickness — or about its weight, [causes the sale to] go back; and even for a small thing. And that is [the meaning of] that which Rava said (Kiddushin 42b), “Anything with a measure, a weight or a number — even less than for [overcharging] — goes back.” And one who wants to be saved from any concern of these matters that we wrote can say to the buyer, “I know that there is [overcharging] up to such-and-such [value] in this object that I am selling to you. If you want to buy it on condition that you do not [claim overcharging] against me, buy it; but if not, leave it.” [Like this, the buyer] has no claim of [overcharging] against him afterwards, nor even words of grievance (as is elucidated in Bava Metzia 51b). And the rest of its details are in the fourth chapter of [Bava] Metzia. (See Tur, Choshen Mishpat 227.)

And [it] is practiced in every place and at all times by males and females. And one who transgresses it and [overcharges] his fellow on purpose by a sixth or more has violated this negative commandment. But they, may their memory be blessed, permitted a trader to profit from less than a sixth for the betterment of civilization, so that people find their needs ready [for them] in every place. And we do not administer lashes for this negative commandment, as it is given to repayment.