Commentary for Bava Metzia 106:11

איבעיא להו חומשא מלגיו או חומשא מלבר אמר רבינא תא שמע הבעלים אומרים בעשרים וכל אדם בעשרים הבעלים קודמין מפני שמוסיפין חומש אמר אחד הרי עלי בעשרים ואחד

R. Johanan said, That [the tithe] <i>itself</i> is not [etc.]; R. Simeon b. Lakish said, Its <i>fifth</i> is less [etc.]. An objection is raised. For second tithe worth less than a <i>perutah</i> it is sufficient to declare, 'That itself and its fifth are redeemed with the first money.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In accordance with Hezekiah's ruling, q.v. supra 52b and notes. It need not be taken to Jerusalem, nor is it necessary to combine it with other produce and redeem the whole. ');">²⁰</span> Now, on the view that [it does not require redemption even if] its fifth is worth less [than a <i>perutah</i>], it is correct; hence he [the Tanna] states 'it is sufficient,' viz., though that itself contains [the value of a <i>perutah</i>], yet since its fifth does not, it is well. But on the view that [the tithe] <i>itself</i> is worth less, what is [the appropriateness of] 'it is sufficient?'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since I could not think that redemption is necessary in such a case. But 'it is sufficient' implies that a concession is made when the law might have been stricter. ');">²¹</span> This is indeed a difficulty. The scholars propounded: Is the fifth calculated on the inner sum [sc. the principal] or on the outer [sc. the principal plus the addition]?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' E.g., if the principal is worth 20 zuz, must one add 4 zuz, a fifth of the principal, or 5, a fifth of the total? ');">²²</span> — Said Rabina: Come and hear: If the owners value it at twenty [<i>sela's</i>], the owners have priority, since they add a fifth. If a stranger declared, 'I accept it for twenty-one,'

Explore commentary for Bava Metzia 106:11. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.