Study Bava Batra folio 82B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
he has acquired an area sufficient for a gatherer of figs and his basket in hand to stand close to the tree. R' Elazar objects to this: Now that the halakha is that the buyer has no path and must purchase a path through the field to access his trees; if so, does he have possession of an area for the
R' Zeira says: From the statement, i.e., the objection, of our teacher, we learn that it is in the case of 3 trees that the owner of the trees has no path, as the buyer acquired a separate piece of land along with the trees. But in the case of two trees the buyer has a path, as he says to the owne
Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said to Rava: Shall we say that R' Elazar does not accept the opinion of Shmuel, who was his teacher? As Shmuel says: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of R' Akiva, who says: One who sells, sells generously. According to R' Akiva, one sells in a manner that is a
Rava said to him: Even if R' Elazar himself agrees with R' Akiva, the Mishnah cannot be explained in accordance with the opinion of R' Akiva. Rather, the Mishnah must be in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis, who hold that one who sells does so sparingly, and the difficulty that R' Elazar r
From where does Rava derive that the Mishnah is not in accordance with the opinion of R' Akiva? From the fact that the Mishnah teaches: If the 3 trees grew, the owner of the land may cut down the branches that extend into his field. And if it enters your mind that the Mishnah is in accordance with