Commentary for Bava Metzia 113:6

אלא ביטול מקח בהא לימא רבי יוחנן צריך לעשות לו דמים מדבריהם והא"ר יונה אהקדשות ורבי ירמיה אמר אקרקעות ותרוייהו משמיה דר' יוחנן אמרי אונאה אין להם ביטול מקח יש להם לעולם בביטול מקח ואיפוך דרבי יוחנן לר"ל ודר"ל לרבי יוחנן

Now, R. Jonah said [the following] in respect to sacred objects, whilst R. Jeremiah said [it] in respect to real estate, both in R. Johanan's name, viz.: The law of overreaching does not apply thereto, but cancellation of sale does. He who said this in reference to sacred objects, would certainly [say it] in reference to real estate [too].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For since cancellation of sale applies to sacred objects, it proves that this does not come within the category of overreaching but of erroneous bargains. Now, if this applies to sacred objects which belong to Heaven, though technically speaking Heaven cannot err (cf. the principle of the British Constitution: The King can do no wrong), it surely holds good in respect to real estate. For since it is agreed that cancellation of sale is not the same as overreaching, we have no verse to exclude land therefrom. ');">⁴</span>

Explore commentary for Bava Metzia 113:6. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.