Related%20passage for Bava Metzia 8:8

הַמַּשְׂכִּיר בַּיִת לַחֲבֵרוֹ לְשָׁנָה, נִתְעַבְּרָה הַשָּׁנָה, נִתְעַבְּרָה לַשּׂוֹכֵר. הִשְׂכִּיר לוֹ לֶחֳדָשִׁים, נִתְעַבְּרָה הַשָּׁנָה, נִתְעַבְּרָה לַמַּשְׂכִּיר. מַעֲשֶׂה בְצִפּוֹרִי בְּאֶחָד שֶׁשָּׂכַר מֶרְחָץ מֵחֲבֵרוֹ בִּשְׁנֵים עָשָׂר זָהָב לְשָׁנָה, מִדִּינַר זָהָב לְחֹדֶשׁ, וּבָא מַעֲשֶׂה לִפְנֵי רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל וְלִפְנֵי רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, וְאָמְרוּ, יַחֲלֹקוּ אֶת חֹדֶשׁ הָעִבּוּר:

If one rents his house to his neighbor for a year, if the year were intercalated, it was intercalated for (the benefit of) the tenant. [(And he does not pay for an additional month, for the intercalation is included in the year.)] If he rented it to him by the month, and the year were intercalated, it was intercalated for the owner. Once, in Sepphoris, a man rented a bath-house from his neighbor for twelve (dinars of) gold for a year, for a golden dinar a month. When the case came before R. Shimon b. Gamliel and R. Yossi, they said: Let them divide the intercalated month. [The Gemara points up a contradiction, the first part of the Mishnah stating that all reverts to the tenant or to the owner and the case-ruling being that they divide! They resolve it thus: The Mishnah is defective. This is what was taught: And if he said to him: (I rent it to you) for twelve (dinars of) gold for a year, for a golden dinar a month, they divide. For we do not know whether to follow the first formulation or the last, and it once happened in Sepphoris, etc. The halachah is not in accordance with R. Shimon b. Gamliel and R. Yossi, but we follow the lesser (monthly) formulation. For land (unless known otherwise) is presumptively the (original) owner's, for which reason it all reverts to the owner, whether the first or the last formulation is the lesser.]

Explore related%20passage for Bava Metzia 8:8. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.