Commentary for Bava Batra 45:10

ואי אשמעינן הכא דכיון דיחיד הוא אימא פיוסיה פייסיה אי נמי אחולי אחיל גביה אבל רבים מאן פייס ומאן שביק אימא לא צריכא:

— The point of R. Zebid's statement lies in the reference to the purchaser. But in regard to the purchaser also we have learnt that 'if a man buys a courtyard in which are beams and balconies projecting over the main thoroughfare, he has a legal right to retain them'?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Infra 60a. Which is exactly similar to the rule laid down here, that the purchaser has a right to retain the dovecotes. Why then should both statements be made? ');">¹⁵</span> — Both statements are necessary. For if I had only the statement regarding the main thoroughfare to go by, I should say that the reason there [for allowing the right to stand] is because the courtyard had been originally drawn back from the main thoroughfare [to allow room for the projection], or that the public had waived its right<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' According to Tosaf., through the 'seven headmen of the town', the boni viri, at a public meeting. ');">¹⁶</span>

Explore commentary for Bava Batra 45:10. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.