Study Bava Metzia folio 116B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Mishnah: In the case of the house and the upper story belonging to two people, i.e., the lower story was owned by one individual, while the upper story belonged to someone else, that collapsed, the two of them divide the timber and the stones and the earth of the collapsed structure. And the court
Talmud: From the fact that the Mishnah teaches that the court considers which stones were likely to break, it can be understood by inference that the case is one in which it is possible to establish with regard to the stones, by looking at the debris, how the accident occurred: Whether it fell with
The Talmud asks: If that is so, that it is possible to ascertain how the collapse occurred, then why, in the first clause of the Mishnah, do they divide the stones without taking the circumstances into consideration? Let us see: If the house fell with a blow, it means that the stones of the upper
The Talmud rejects this analysis: No, it is necessary to state the ruling of the Mishnah in a case when the house collapsed at night, and no one saw how it fell. The Talmud challenges: But in such a case, let them see the stones in the morning to ascertain how the house collapsed. The Talmud answe
The Talmud challenges: But even in such a case, let them see in whose domain the stones are situated. And once this is determined, the halakha will be that the burden of proof rests upon the claimant, i.e., the owner of the stones situated in the other’s domain. The Talmud answers: No, it is neces