If one surrounded his neighbor (with fields) from three sides, and he fenced the first, the second, and the third, he (the neighbor) is not obligated (to share the fencing expenses), [for he (the first) did not benefit him at all, his land still being open. But if he (the first) fenced the fourth side, in which instance he definitely benefits him, he (the neighbor) is obligated to pay, nominally, half the cost of reeds (i.e., of a reed fence), but not half of his (the first's expenses. For he (the neighbor) can say to him: For me, a reed partition is sufficient, and I do not want the expense of a stone fence.] R. Yossi says: If he (the first) arose and fenced the fourth (side), all is imposed upon him (the neighbor) [that is, half of the actual fencing expenses. And this is the difference between the first tanna and R. Yossi. The halachah is in accordance with R. Yossi. And it goes without saying that if the surrounded one fenced the fourth side, making it evident that he favors his neighbor's fencing, all is imposed upon him, and he pays half of his neighbor's expenses.]
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Batra
אין מחייבין אותו – for it doesn’t benefit him at all, for his land is still open. But, if he (i.e., the other partner) fenced in the fourth side, for now, it absolutely benefits him, we require him to pay one-half the cost of the purchase at the cheapest rate. But not half of his outlay, for he says to him: For me it is enough for me with a partition of reeds, and I don’t need an outlay of a stone fence.”
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Batra
Introduction
Mishnah three discusses a person who builds a fence partially around another person’s property and wishes that person to share in the costs of the fence.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Batra
מגלגלין עליו את הכל – one-half of his outlay according to what he fenced in. And there is the difference between the first Tanna/teacher and Rabbi Yosi. And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yosi. And we don’t have to say if he himself is the one who fenced in the fourth side, for he revealed his intention that he is pleased with what his fellow fenced in that we make him bear the expenses for the fencing in of everything, and he pays his fellow half of his outlays.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Batra
If a man’s land surrounded his fellow’s land on three sides, and he fenced it on the first and the second and the third sides, they do not obligate him [to share in the costs]. Rabbi Yose says: “If he rose a built a fence on the fourth side, they obligate him to share in all of the costs.” In the scenario discussed in this mishnah Reuven owns three fields which surround Shimon’s fields on three of its four sides. If Reuven were to fence in all three of his fields he would have built a fence around three sides of Shimon’s fields. Since this fence does not totally surround Shimon’s field, Reuven cannot claim that Shimon benefited from the field and should therefore share in the costs. Rabbi Yose adds that if Shimon were to fence in four sides, he would thereby show that he wished to have his field fenced in. In that case he is obligated to share in the costs of all of the fences, since he now benefits from them all.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Batra
Questions for Further Thought: • If Reuven owns fields surrounding all four sides of Shimon’s field and he puts a fence around all of them, will Shimon have to share in the costs?
