Study Bava Metzia folio 57A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
This is Rava’s dilemma: What is the halakha? Is it permitted for one to take some of the kernels and eat from them? Is their legal status like that of kernels cast into a jug, and the sacrifice of the omer offering rendered their consumption permitted? Or perhaps he subordinated them to the ground,
§ Rava said that Rav Ḥasa said that R' Ami raises a dilemma with regard to those matters that are not subject to the halakhot of exploitation: Is the halakha that they are not subject to exploitation where the disparity in the price is 1/6th, but they are subject to nullification of the transaction
The Talmud comments: The one who states that this ruling applies to consecrated property, all the more so does it apply to land. The one who states that this ruling applies to land states it only with regard to land, but it does not apply to consecrated property, in accordance with the opinion of Sh
We learned in a Mishnah there (Temura 26b): If the consecrated animal was blemished and another was substituted for it, the blemished animal leaves its consecrated state and assumes non-sacred status, and one is required to calculate the difference in monetary value between the two animals and pay i
The Talmud asks: With what are we dealing? If we say that the difference between the value of the substitute animal and the value of the consecrated animal was the measure of exploitation, does Reish Lakish say in that case: He is required to calculate the difference in monetary value and pay it to