Responsa for Bava Batra 82:3

על מה נחלקו על כת אחת שאחד אומר מנה ואחד אומר מאתים שבית שמאי אומרים נחלקה עדותן ובית הלל אומרים יש בכלל מאתים מנה

[He replied:] Rabbi Simeon b. Eleazar, as it has been taught: 'Rabbi Simeon b. Eleazar states that Beth Shammai and Beth Hillel agreed that if there are two sets of witnesses [to a loan], one of which says [that the loan was for] one <i>maneh</i> and the other [for] two <i>manehs</i>, [their evidence is accepted in respect of the one <i>maneh</i>] because one <i>maneh</i> is included in two. Where they differed was in the case where there is one pair [of witnesses of whom] one says that [the loan was for] a <i>maneh</i> and the other [that it was for] two <i>manehs</i>. In that case Beth Shammai held that their evidence is at variance, whereas Beth Hillel held that two <i>manehs</i> include one.' R. Kahana rejoined: But I can bring you a letter from the West [Eretz Yisrael] to show that the <i>halachah</i> does not follow R. Simeon. To which Rab Judah replied: [Meanwhile my decision can stand] till you bring it.

Explore responsa for Bava Batra 82:3. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.