Commentary for Bava Batra 209:8

ומי סבירא ליה והאמר שמואל בבא באמצע החדש עסקינן אבל בא בתחלת החדש כולו למשכיר בסוף החדש כולו לשוכר

[This, surely, shows that Samuel<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who stated, in the second case, that the buyer acquired possession of every se'ah as it was measured out, on account of the expression, 'each se'ah for a sela', which the seller used after he said, 'I sell you a kor for thirty'. ');">²¹</span> is of the same opinion as Ben Nannus!]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who stated that the second expression cancels the first. ');">²²</span> — But, [it may be replied that] 'this', [may denote that Samuel] is of the same opinion.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As Ben Nannus. 'This etc', only indicates that the Rabbis disagree. ');">²³</span> Does [Samuel, however,] hold the same opinion? Surely Samuel said: [The Mishnah which states that the rent of the bath house for the intercalary month is to be divided] speaks [only of the case] where [the owner] comes<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To the court. ');">²⁴</span> in the middle<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since it is doubtful which expression cancels which, the money and the bath house are to remain in the possession of their respective owners. For the first half of the month, therefore, which has already passed, no rent can be claimed from the tenant who is in possession of his money. For the second half, however, the owner may claim the rent, since the property is his, and he has the power to prevent the other from using it. ');">²⁵</span> of the month, but where he comes at the beginning of the month all [the rent of the month] belongs to the owner,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because the property is in his possession. ');">²⁶</span> [and if he comes] at the end of the month, all [the rent of the month] belongs to the tenant.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because his money is to remain with him, who holds it in possession. ');">²⁷</span> [Does not this prove that Samuel disagrees<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since he is doubtful as to whether the first, or second expression is to be regarded as binding. Cf. supra n. 6. ');">²⁸</span> with Ben Nannus?]

Explore commentary for Bava Batra 209:8. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.