Commentary for Bava Metzia 200:9
הא לא קשיא כדמחליף רבה בר אבוה ותני רבי מאיר אומר משלם כשעת הגזילה וחכ"א אומר לו בעבדים הרי שלך לפניך
reversed [the Mishnah] and read: R. Meir said: He must pay their value at the time of the robbery; but the Sages ruled: In the case of slaves he can say to him [the owner], 'Behold, here is yours before you.' But [there is this difficulty]: How do we know that R. Meir holds that real estate is equated to slaves: just as an oath is taken for slaves, so also is an oath taken for real estate? Perhaps [in his opinion] there is an oath only in respect of slaves, but not for immovable property?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Whilst our Mishnah states that an oath is administered when it is disputed which field was sold, so that our Mishnah cannot after all represent the view of R. Meir. ');"><sup>9</sup></span>
Explore commentary for Bava Metzia 200:9. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.