Responsa for Bava Metzia 112:14
לא צריכא דחצדינהו וזרעינהו קודם לעומר ואתא ליה עומר וחליף עילוייהו ולא אשרוש קודם לעומר
Is it as though he had placed it [the seed] in a pitcher, and therefore an oath must be taken; or perhaps, he assimilated it to the soil, and so no oath is taken?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' No oath is imposed for a claim of land. ');"><sup>26</sup></span> [Again,] does the <i>'omer</i><span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos. ');"><sup>27</sup></span> permit it [for food] or not?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The produce of each year was not permitted for food until the 'omer (sheaf of corn) was brought to the Temple and waved before the Lord. (Lev. XXIII, 10-14); until then it was called hadash, 'new.' ');"><sup>28</sup></span> But how is this meant? If it took root, then we have learnt it; and if not, we have also learnt it. For we learnt: If they [the seeds] took root before the [bringing of the] <i>'omer</i>, the <i>'omer</i> permits them;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The resultant crop, though maturing after the 'omer, is nevertheless permitted for use. ');"><sup>29</sup></span> if not, they are forbidden until the bringing of the next <i>'omer</i>!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Men. 70a. ');"><sup>30</sup></span> — This arises only if he reaped and resowed it before the <i>'omer</i>,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., he resowed that years grain, the 'new' crop, before the 'omer. Had he not resown it, the 'omer of course would have permitted it. ');"><sup>31</sup></span> then the <i>'omer</i> came and went,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The 'omer was brought, and its time — the sixteenth of Nissan passed by. ');"><sup>32</sup></span> whilst it did not take root before the [bringing of the] <i>'omer</i>.
Teshuvot Maharam
This Responsum is addressed "to my teacher Rabbi Asher."
SOURCES: Am II, 241; cf. Mord. B. M. 383; Asheri B. M. 25.
Teshuvot Maharam
A. Since A acted upon B's offer, the latter cannot, now, dismiss such offer as a mere jest. However, A is not entitled to receive the full amount offered, if such amount exceeds the actual value of his services by more than one-sixth. If such is the case, A is entitled to the actual value of his services only.
This Responsum is addressed to "my relative R. Kalonymus."
SOURCES: B. p. 294 no. 372.