Study Bava Metzia folio 69A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
or it must have been that the other party accepted one-half of the loss and that Rav Ilish was entitled to 2/3rds of the profit. Either way, the disparity in the terms served as payment to Rav Ilish for his effort, removing any concern about violation of the prohibition of interest.
Rav Kahana said: I said this halakha before Rav Zevid of Neharde’a and he said to me: Why is it certain that the document included all the details of the transaction? Perhaps Rav Ilish immersed his bread in brine together with the other party? According to the opinion of R' Yehuda, this would suffi
The Talmud comments: This too stands to reason, as, if you do not say so, why did Rav Naḥman list them individually and say: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of so-and-so, and the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of so-and-so? Instead let Rav Naḥman say simply: The halakha is
§ Rav says: If one says to another: I am giving you a calf to fatten, and let us divide the profit between us when it is sold, and the surplus over 1/3rd of its current value is your wages, meaning that they will split the profits up to 1/3rd of the value of the calf, and any additional profits wi
The Talmud asks: And does Rav hold that he is not required to set aside a dinar for him? But doesn’t Rav say a different way to structure such an arrangement, that the head of the calf is given to the fattener, i.e., they may divide most of the profits evenly, but the head of the calf is given as a