Commentary for Bava Batra 67:4

אלא אי דמיא הא דרבי אבא לחד סהדא ולתרתי שני ולפירי:

Abaye, however, said to the Rabbis: Are the two cases on all fours? [There in the case of the bar of metal] the witness comes to oppose [the defendant], and if there were another witness with him we should make him give up the article. Here [in the case of the land] the witness comes to support [the defendant], and if there were another witness we should confirm his title to the land.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since therefore the witness is in support of the occupier he cannot be made without more ado to pay for the produce, but might take an oath to confirm his claim in regard to the produce, though in the absence of two witnesses to prove his right he would have to return the land; v. Yad Ramah, a.l. ');">⁴</span> If you do wish to draw a parallel with the case of R. Abbah, it would be in the case of one witness [who testifies that the occupier has had the use of the land] two years, and [where the claim is for] the produce.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Here the witness is against the occupier, since he testifies that he occupied it only two years and not three, and if another witness made the same statement he would have to pay. Hence he is under obligation to deny the statement of the one witness on oath. This, however, he cannot do, as he admits that he has consumed the produce for two years. Hence he must pay. ');">⁵</span>

Explore commentary for Bava Batra 67:4. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.