Young Israel of Westside Shiurim
Baba Basra 90
after that side he was starting to fall lines off in the bottom of "pay test" on the base where the camera says "timey namiyaki" we are discussing the Eastern not only to use false measures but even to have the false measures. So "timey namiyaki" the right says "laiyasha al demi de kasir manseer oiyu service" so a base of person cannot keep around and undersize or oversized measure around in the house. I feel the obitomeric line even if you just want to use it as a urinal. That is also forbidden. Even if you can designate the user saying else that's not allowed to be done. You can't have the false measure there at all. Now we talk about what types of measures a person should have a "osu" who saw, should have a "sau" that is equal to 6th calf, "tarkov" means contraction, trait and calf. So it's half. So it's half of a "sau" that is half of a "sau" that holds 3th calf, trait and calf, 2 plus 1. And katsu tarkov, a half tarkov. So that would be something that holds 1 and a half calf, one and a half calf, the calf and one that holds at 1 calf, the calf and the calf and half of the "rova" and one that holds a quarter calf. This "so" one holds in 1/8th of a "cav" that's half of a "lug", the calf and half of an "aive". Half of that amount. "Tapa lama d'alfa" "oohla" and "oohla" "a" "oohla" "how much can "oohla" hold "oohla" "oohla" "oohla" means you should be revealed at 1/5th of a quarter calf. Continues the "gama" "a" "ooh" means that's a "lak" when you have liquid measures who else, how much did you make? You should make one that's "hing", "hati hing", she doesn't reveal a "hing". So "hing" is 12-lug, so you have that similar thing here. You have the "hing", half "hing", one that holds 6, a third one that holds 4, and a quarter one that holds 3. The "lug" then you have one that holds a "lug" that holds a "lug" that holds a "lug" that holds a "lug" that holds a "lug" that holds a "lug" that holds a "lug" that holds a "lug" that holds a "lug" that holds a "lug" that holds a "lug" that holds a "lug" that holds a "lug" that holds a "lug" that holds a "lug" that holds a "lug" that holds a "lug" that holds a quarter of an "aive". The "lug" that holds a quarter of an "aive" that holds a "lug" that holds a "lug" that a problem because a Tarkov is supposed to hold three. So if you have one that holds two, somebody might get ripped off by a third. If one, if you have a two-cop measure, it's just two thirds, two thirds, the sides of the Tarkov. So the customer wants a Tarkov, you might measure him in the two-cop one and charge him as if he's giving him a three-cop one. So therefore, that's a problem. So if you're not allowed to have the two-cop one. So as the Gomara, what do we see from here? Amato, Inchi, Tilsa, people can make a mistake by up to a third. That's why you're saying don't have a two-cop one because someone might think it's a three-cop one. If so, it shouldn't be permitted to make even a measure of a cop. If someone might confuse it with a half-tarkov, which is one and a half-cop. So what's one and a half-cop is more than one. That's a third larger. This is the same way you're saying two to three. People might make a mistake. So you should have a problem. You shouldn't have a one and one and a half. As at the Mars, we have to give a different answer. It's our original question. Ella could buy a matter of time to love it. What's the reason we don't have a two-cop one? We don't have a two-cop one. We might be confused with a half-tarkov. Half-tarkov is one and a half-cop, and that would be smaller than a two-cop measure. How much is one and a half smaller than only one-fourth? So people will make a mistake up until a fourth. So you're right. Two to three a third. People won't make a mistake, but up until a fourth they will. So that's why since we have a half-tarkov, which is one and a half-cop, we don't want to have a two-cop one. It says, "What's the takeaway?" We shouldn't be permitted to have both half-tarkov and an ukla. Because the half of an eighth measure is one-sixteenth of a cop, and the ukla is one-twenty of a cop, so that's less than a fourth. So what's the shot? That's not going to lead to trickery. When you have a two-cop one, you don't want to have a two-cop one. People will confuse with a one-and-a-half one. But when you have the small, the smaller ones were not concerned. It says that tomorrow, so we've been saying that if something is a difference by only one-fourth, you could have a problem. So when we went to the liquids, we had a third of a two-cop one. So when you have a two-cop one, people will confuse with a one-and-a-half one. But when you have the small, the smaller ones were not concerned. But when you have a problem, so when we went to the liquids, we had a third of a-and-a-quarter of a-hands. As tomorrow, we shouldn't do that, so we shouldn't be allowed to have a third of a-and-a-quarter-hand. The quarter-hand measure has three-fourths of that amount of the one-third-hand. So won't that make a difference? Won't people get confused? As the mark you have in the victor, she'll gather up on it. These measures exist in the base of miktosh. They would use them further than the sakim, for the wine division, to the base of miktosh. Depending on the animal, ox, ram, lamb. So for a ram, what was a third, and for a lamb, was a quarter. So we see that the one-third-of-an-quarter-hand exists in the base of miktosh. Their up on them weren't going to be guys there, not to use such measures outside the base of miktosh. As we kind of follow the precedent of the base of miktosh, as these measures existed there, we're not going to say don't use them outside. So as the mark wall goof up, there's an enemy looks there. We should be creating the base of miktosh as well, not to use these two measures, because it might lead to confusion. Aye, frick-tite system. What are we going to do when we need to measure out the nuzakim? We need to have the right amount. The answer is you could use a lug, and you could just count out three luggin. Our four luggin, depending on whether it's like that, you don't have to have the bigger one, the bigger ones that measure it all at once. So the mark answer, the co-anims reason, hey, the co-anims are very, they're very diligent, and they would never make a mistake. And once, even though that really applies to co-anims, but again, that's as far as the co-anims, that once it existed in the base of miktosh, we're not going to go, don't do it outside the base of miktosh. Therefore, ultimately, we are defending that people could make a mistake by a quarter, but we still allow the quarter and the third of the hand by the liquids, because we find that precedent in their existence in the base of miktosh. It says the co-anims are now immerseable, even though it's even useless in which it does. Whenever the citizens in the town want to increase the size of a measure, they can't do it by more than a six. In other words, they're making a decision here. They're making a uniform increase in the size of all the measures and break the old measures, so it shouldn't be done by more than one-six. The ratio of the new measure, the old one can have a greater difference of six to five. We'll see the reason. The low amount of behaviors in which it shows if they're increasing the value of the coins, they can't do that by more than a six. If I'm a stacker, if someone is profiting, in other words, he's buying and then selling, I'm talking to Mr. Shush. Mr. Shush, you shouldn't do it for more than a six. And as a retail person, he's buying from Ulster, and selling to customers, he can mark up the price, but not by more than a six. So the tomorrow now explains. Hey, what's the value of Mr. Shush? What's the reason we don't increase the measure by more than a six-mile time? Even if you're nervous, it's going to cause inflation, because the merchants are going to obviously address the price as well, because there's more. So now they might say, oh, we're making the price, so they might take advantage of that opportunity and raise the price more than they should be doing. So you're nervous. They're going to cause unjustified inflation. It shows nominal, and they shouldn't even increase it by a six. That's also a significant amount that we should be worried about. So we can't be that we're caught when nervous about the economics of raising the measures, because now the sellers would have to raise the prices, because if we're nervous about the inflation, that might lead to, which shouldn't even be much at all. Let me show you a note. Maybe we're nervous about price fraud, because when it went off, the buyer pays too much, or the signing pays too little, and the seller has been defrauded. So there are a lot of halakhos. If it's under a six, we say it's all machila. There's no refund. If it's a sauce, then the sale stands, and you get back the money, and if it's more than a six, then the whole thing is bought off, and the wholesale can be voided. So maybe, what we're nervous about is that we allow an increase by more than a six, so some merchant might make a mistake, and give a new measure of produce for the old price, so the wholesale would be voided, because the underpin would be more than a six. We don't want that to happen. A little bit of a metric, we're concerned for that category, but in other words, it's like, we're not concerned for anything more than we know about the sale. So if as long as we're in a six, we're okay, but once it's a six, we're going to have a big problem, because that can cause bit of a metric. If, again, we have increased measurements, and if you forget to reflect the change in the price, then it would be really be a bit of a metric. So if a merchant was unaware that the size was changed, and the sale should be voided, even if it was increased by less than a six, so if the whole thing you're saying is going to do it by more than a six, because of the way that it might impact the bit of a metric. So then, that law shouldn't depend on a six, because these are things that are sold, though it should be the musical minimum. They're the law's own odds that any change, but even less than a six, you can totally avoid the sale. So it can't be, that's what's motivating us. It says, the law, the law, they say it's a diagram. The reason why we don't want to change the metric between a six is that a merchant, merchant, as we saw, he normally profits by a six. We shouldn't suffer any loss of his principal. Let's say he would mistakenly sell the new measure for the old price, then he would have no profit. So we don't want him to have a loss. I shouldn't say, he shouldn't have any loss. So in other words, he's normally raising his prices when he buys the whole salary, then he raises the price of a six, when he sells the individuals. So you want to make sure that he doesn't have a loss. So therefore, you can't increase the measures by more than a six, so that even if he wouldn't make a mistake and sell for the old price of what it was, he won't have a loss. As I said, I would say that you're only concerned that he shouldn't suffer a loss, where after a loss, does he not need a profit? If someone just buys and sells for the same price, it's just to be called a merchant. Basically, we're saying that if you're concerned for that possibility, that the merchant will sell for the old price, because he's not aware that the measure was raised, then you should have to ensure that he has a profit, just ensuring that he doesn't have a loss should not suffice. Ela Amar Christo Schmocke, Ashgachadar Schmocke found the positive that allowed it. And it was what's the point that we're saying. We're going to see that from the positive that is much to add as six to the measurements, even though that might make a problem for a merchant who was unaware for it. Lemise, we see in the positive that it's okay. And we see in the positive is okay up to a six, but more than that, but they're up on it, they didn't want it, they shouldn't suffer a loss. We were asking before, yeah, but not suffering a loss, but not having yet is also a problem. Essentially, the more advanced there is, but we still see in the positive that you can raise it by a six. So, we're nervous that the guy might suffer a loss, but up until the six, we have precedent for the positive that it's much better. Where do we see this? We have a positive, cryptic positive, and safer here at high school. It says that Chacal, Ashgachal is 20. Chacal is not to say Ashgachal is 20. Chacal is 25. Chacal is 25. Chacal is 25. Chacal is 10 and 5. Chacal, that's equal to a mana. So, what the positive is doing is making us do some math over here. It says that the mana is 60. Chacal doesn't say 60. It says 20, 25, and 15. That equals 60. So, it's saying that the mana, in the base that make Josh, was equal to 60, Chacal. Now, there's a big problem with that. The top element base, because mana mustn't wrap on the oven. So, a Chacal, just to understand, is for dinner. So, if you're going to multiply 60 times 4, you're going to get 240. But, that would be off, says the Gomar. Is it true that a mana has 240 dinner or 60 Chacal in it? That's not true. Why? Because it's an established fact. Everyone knows a mana only has 100 dinner. So, where are we getting 240? We're 140 off. That's why I'm not the last. We have to learn a few things. First of all, I'm going to Monashal. Monashal called it Chacal. At the base that make Josh, at their mana was double the common mana. Now, there's the basic, the basic value that what a mana is. They had a double in the measurement of the 1 in the mana used in the base. So, that explains what you get from 100 to 200. Which, I mean, I'm going to see if you're going to help me do this. We see that you can add on to the measure of coins. So, that's why it's more, it was added on. They added on a 6. What do you mean they added on a 6? Basically, we're explaining this. They made an adjustment. We're talking about the common mana, which used to be 25 Chacal. Again, 25 dinner to get to 100 for that. They added on 25 to 30 Chacal. So, they're adding some in. So, 25 to 30 is a 6. It's called a 6 from the outside. Because afterwards, we would say you're adding a 5th, but it ends up being a 6th more. In other words, if I have 30, then I divide it into 6 parts. It's, each one is 5. So, I'll go pot name. So, I, they added on to it. So, that explains from the 200 to the 240. So, once we see from the puzzle, that you could be myself and me this up until the 6th. So, not with your opponent, they weren't going to go there. What we saw already was permitted from the puzzle. But more than that, we're not going to allow. So, it seems like Lamyse, the reason why we shouldn't make the measurements more than a 6 is because we're nervous for merchant who might sell at his, at his old price and not make a profit. And, and even receive a loss. And as for the profit, Lamyse, we see from the puzzle gets permitted up until the 6th. It says in our preparation, we'll talk in Kylo, about elastic fees. He established in his town that there was a measure that would hold 3 capises, which is 9 Logan. So, he made a new measure of something which would hold 9, 9 looks. So, I'm related, they said, which one was even making me sure? So, you're not allowed to add on more than a 6. Your new measure is older than the old measure, which was the closest one was 6 looks. So, that's, that's more, that's a third. There was a measure of 6 look and you're instituting a measure of 9 look. So, how do you like to do that? I'm just making a new measure. I'm not increasing the size of an old one. There's no measure in these towns comparable to the one. So, therefore, there's no problem with making a new one out of the blue. And, if you're adding on to the old one and you're saying, this is now what that is, that's a problem. But, if you're just instituting a new one, that's not a problem. Shagapam desu vukabla, he sent his measure, pum desu, they didn't accept it. Shagapam desu vukabla, he sent it, they didn't accept it. Shagapam desu vukabla, they didn't accept it. Shagapam desu vukabla, they didn't accept it. Shagapam desu vukabla, they did accept it. They called it the measure of apan. In other words, they're creating shortages in the sense they take all the goods from the market and they withhold it, which makes the price rise. And then, they can sell it out of huge profits. For people who do that, a mouth-oburve is people who let measures back to the APA. People who reduce the size of the measure of the APA. In other words, they measure our produce to the customer with a smaller APA and cheat them. We have key sharing people who distort the market. They make artificial reasons why the market might go up on them. Regarding them, what does the positive say? Leimard must have our coalition as we have it. One of them this month passed and we can sell it. Shagapam desu vukabla, the shagapas comes so that we can open up the storehouse with the green. La haute and apa, la haute, la haute and chacula. Ava's mostly a merma reduced the APA measure and enlarged the chacula and falsify all the balances. These are what the Succam, here I'm talking about. These bad people say what does it say afterwards. Nishvasham, kon yaku, nashkakan, ashkakan, sakomazam, ashm swears. He will never forget any of these bad, these that these people do. So even though it seems like they're getting away with it and they're making a fortune, the positive basically is saying that our coalition will punish them. Ote, peros, gugon mai, what does it mean people will hoard fruit? Amr bhiokan, gogshab, say, ote peros, shab, say, ote peros, shab, say, ote peros, hoare, or fruit. In other words, what we're basically saying is that he was a well-known manipulator. He would hoard a large source of them and then take advantage of people. He would sell it at a higher price. But the point that the Gomara is saying is that if a person holds fruit from the market because he's going to sell it later to the poor at the original lower price, that's not a problem. Even though the rush-bound man has made contribute so much to a rising price, because now Lamisa, there's less supply, so the prices might go up. But if these people have good intentions and then later they're going to sell it to the poor at original lower price, then that's okay. So it's an interesting thing. The Gomara is specifying it's bad when you're doing it just to manipulate the system and sell it and take advantage of the poor and sell it to them way at a higher price. But if you kind of have a good intention, even if you're going to cause some rise in the prices, but that can be okay. It says the Gomara. Different people did it differently. I have a word that Shmoopi, I have a word that Shmoopi would sell as produce, but as with the Sarekharpha, the Sarekharpha, at the time of the early market for the early market price, he tried to flood the market in the early time. Shmoopi rei, Maushelepera, Maushelepera, Maushelepera, Maushelepera, Maushele, Shmoosan, would hold on to the Paris and sell it. At the time of the Sarekharpha, he would sell it at the late market for the early market price. So let's understand a little bit better. At the time of the early market, everything was there, generally the prices were lower in the early season. At the end of the season, they were a little bit more. So Shmoopi's father, he said an idea. How is he going to help the poor? He's going to make sure that there should be a particularly low level in the beginning. So he sold early. So then most people would have everyone would sell early, and that would make a final price at a lower. Shmoopi, okay, hold on to it. Hold on to it later, and then only go sell it later in the season at a lower price. So just to understand, Shmoopi did that, his prices will get higher, but he's going to sell it to that name at a lower price. Shmoopi's father, he's trying to set the price in from the outset, is being lower than it would have normally been. So they're both have good intentions, but which one was better economically? Shmoopi, Tom, they sent from R2S, which most father did was better. My time, Maushele, once the market price is eased, then it's going to remain that way. In other words, that's just the way it is. Once a low price has been established in the middle and beginning of the market, it tends to remain lower for the rest of the year. Now, Shmoopi, once prices go up, they don't come down so quickly, even after you bring in your new produce. So Shmoopi was holding it so that he could sell that later. Maushele, who wasn't going to cause the prices to go down so much. I'm a ravos. Although Maushele, also a person can make his own portion into an outside, meaning you're not allowed to buy Tom from the market and hoard it. But if you're allowed to pile up whatever you harvest from your own fields, because that's probably not going to cause such a significant rise in the produce, that's only a small amount. So whatever you do, from your fields, you could hold out. It's like this, you can't hoard the type of produce that are staples of life, hiding out those other things, maybe you could. But things like food, you cannot kill. You know Shmoopi is also like wine, oils, and flowers. I have a taco, I have a taco. I have a taco in the middle, but I'm regarding seasoning, cumin, peppers, mutter, you're allowed to hoard. I met a vermin, but I'm going to show that it's all also only if you buy it from the market. Maushele, whenever you're gathering your own produce, then you could withhold it from the market. That's exactly like Rob said, though. It's yours only when you're to buy things from the market and hold on to them. But to hold your own stuff, that's okay. It continues to rise, and much of a lot of them lots of pairs, but it's so good. I'm going to show them. A lot of hoard produce and artists are all during the following three years. Irish wheat, shvees, and much of those times, it is okay. Because obviously people have to live off the stuff that they hold on to. So there, it's mutter. It's not about source. At the time, when they're it's famine, I feel like I've grew up in La Jaz, or even, you know, cob of carrots, you're not allowed to hold on. You should not be able to show them. You never know. You may mess up the markets completely. Even the slight fluctuation and supply may mess everything up. So even if you're to your own produce, you're normally that's mutter, but in time, when there's a famine, it's totally less for a farmer to do that. He can't hold more than a year's supply of even his own things. Because it can cause a significant jump in the market. So as a tomorrow's story, I'm going to show you the fugas. I'm going to show you the fugas. I'm going to show you the fugas. I'm going to show you the fugas. I'm going to show you the fugas. I'm going to show you the fugas. I'm going to show you the fugas. So that is allowed in our interest role. As we said during those specific times, as long as not a famine, a person can hoard specifically during those times.