Talmud Bavli
Talmud Bavli

Responsa for Bava Batra 34:5

אביי אמר סומך דהא אינה עשויה לבורות רבא אמר אינו סומך דאמר ליה כי היכי דאת אימלכת וחפרת אנא נמי ממלכנא וחפרנא

both agree that he may not dig close up. Where they differ is in the case of a field where pits would not naturally be dug; Abaye says he may dig, because it is not naturally a field for digging pits [and therefore his neighbour is not likely to want to dig one on the other side]. while Raba says he may not dig; because his neighbour can say to him, 'Just as you have altered your mind and want to dig, so I may alter my mind and want to dig.' Others report [this argument as follows]: In the case of a field where pits would not naturally be dug, both [Abaye and Raba] agree that he may dig close up to the boundary. Where they differ is in the case of a field where pits would naturally be dug. Abaye says that in such a field the owner may dig, and would be allowed to dig even by the Rabbis who lay down that a tree must not be planted within twenty-five cubits of a pit;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lest the roots spread and injure the pit, v. infra 25a. ');"><sup>4</sup></span>

Teshuvot Maharam

Q. B constructed a stone duct near A's wooden house. A objected and B made a written promise to compensate him for any damage the duct might cause to his house. A now demands that B remove his duct because it occasionally permits water and sewage to flow into his house, and he objects to being forced to sue for damages every time it occurs. B claims that water flows into A's house only when the duct breaks. He promises to keep the duct in good condition, but refuses to remove it.
A. B must remove his duct from A's wall for a distance of 3 tefahim (hand-breadths). If the water should, nevertheless, continue to flow into A's house, it is for A to protect his wall by whatever means he sees fit, but he can demand nothing of B.
SOURCES: Cr. 3, 4; Pr. 92; L. 357; Mord. B. B. 520.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Previous VerseFull ChapterNext Verse