Responsa for Bava Batra 199:7
אמר ר' אלעזר מ"ט דר' אליעזר דכתיב (בראשית יג, יז) קום התהלך בארץ לארכה ולרחבה כי לך אתננה ורבנן התם משום חביבותא דאברהם הוא דקאמר ליה הכי כדי שיהא נוח לכבוש לפני בניו
must not be destroyed.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' B.K. 28a; supra 12a; 26b; 60b. If the owner of the land had raised no objection at the time possession was taken by the public. How much less may the path be abolished when, as in our Mishnah, the public had taken possession with the owner's full consent ');"><sup>13</sup></span> Whereby does the public acquire possession [of the path, according to] R. Eliezer?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since R. Eliezer does not speak of taking possession', but of 'choosing'. ');"><sup>14</sup></span>
Teshuvot Maharam
Q. A claims that his assets, equal to forty marks, for which the community demands a tax, are not taxable.
A. The decisions on questions of taxation are dependent more on custom than on talmudic law. The following rule is generally accepted by the communities: In any tax dispute between an individual and the community, the latter first collects the tax and then goes to court. Therefore, even before the tax is collected, the community is considered to be in possession of the tax-money, and the burden of proof falls upon the individual. This is not only an accepted custom, but also good talmudic law, and is operative even in a new community where there are no established customs. But if the community in question has a different custom, that custom prevails, though it be at variance with talmudic law.
This Responsum is addressed to R. Eliakim ha-Kohen.
SOURCES: Pr. 106; Mord. B. B. 522; cf. also Cr. 49; Pr. 708, 915; L. 371; Am II, 130. Agudah B.M. 108; Moses Minz, Responsa 72; Terumat Hadeshen 341.
A. The decisions on questions of taxation are dependent more on custom than on talmudic law. The following rule is generally accepted by the communities: In any tax dispute between an individual and the community, the latter first collects the tax and then goes to court. Therefore, even before the tax is collected, the community is considered to be in possession of the tax-money, and the burden of proof falls upon the individual. This is not only an accepted custom, but also good talmudic law, and is operative even in a new community where there are no established customs. But if the community in question has a different custom, that custom prevails, though it be at variance with talmudic law.
This Responsum is addressed to R. Eliakim ha-Kohen.
SOURCES: Pr. 106; Mord. B. B. 522; cf. also Cr. 49; Pr. 708, 915; L. 371; Am II, 130. Agudah B.M. 108; Moses Minz, Responsa 72; Terumat Hadeshen 341.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy