Study Bava Kamma folio 102B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
to purchase wheat for him, which he plans to sell at a profit, and instead the agent purchased barley with the money, or if he gave his agent money to purchase barley and instead he purchased wheat with the money, two baraitot issue discordant rulings with regard to the halakha. It is taught in one
To reconcile the baraitot, R' Yoḥanan said: This is not difficult. This first baraita is in accordance with the opinion of R' Meir, and this second baraita is in accordance with the opinion of R' Yehuda.
R' Yoḥanan explains his rationale: This first baraita is in accordance with the opinion of R' Meir, who says that a change by an agent that deviates from the terms of his assignment means that the agent acquires the item in question for himself, as in the case of one who was paid to dye wool red but
R' Elazar objects to this explanation: From where do you say that the dispute between R' Meir and R' Yehuda extends to the case of these baraitot? Perhaps R' Meir says that a change by an agent from the terms of his assignment results in the acquisition of the item by the agent only with regard to a
Rather, R' Elazar said: Both this baraita and that baraita are written in accordance with the opinion of R' Meir, and it is not difficult. Here, in the first baraita, it is discussing grain purchased for eating, and since the one who appointed the agent desired wheat, he does not acquire the barl