Comentário sobre Baba Metzia 10:3
הַבַּיִת וְהָעֲלִיָּה שֶׁל שְׁנַיִם שֶׁנָּפְלוּ, אָמַר בַּעַל הָעֲלִיָּה לְבַעַל הַבַּיִת לִבְנוֹת, וְהוּא אֵינוֹ רוֹצֶה לִבְנוֹת, הֲרֵי בַעַל הָעֲלִיָּה בּוֹנֶה אֶת הַבַּיִת וְדָר בְּתוֹכוֹ עַד שֶׁיִּתֶּן לוֹ אֶת יְצִיאוֹתָיו. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אַף זֶה דָּר בְּתוֹךְ שֶׁל חֲבֵרוֹ, צָרִיךְ לְהַעֲלוֹת לוֹ שָׂכָר, אֶלָּא בַעַל הָעֲלִיָּה בּוֹנֶה אֶת הַבַּיִת וְאֶת הָעֲלִיָּה וּמְקָרֶה אֶת הָעֲלִיָּה, וְיוֹשֵׁב בַּבַּיִת עַד שֶׁיִּתֶּן לוֹ אֶת יְצִיאוֹתָיו:
Uma casa e um andar superior pertencendo a dois, [a casa de um e o andar superior ao outro], que caiu —Se o dono do andar superior mandou o dono da casa construir [a parede e o teto inferior, que ele é obrigado a construir], e ele recusou, o dono do andar superior constrói a casa e vive nela até que ele (o outro) paga as despesas. [Ele constrói a casa e o teto mais baixo e habita nela até recuperar suas despesas, e depois ele a desocupa e constrói sua história superior.] R. Yehudah diz: Este também vive na casa do vizinho, e ele deve pagar a ele! [ie, se sim, quando as despesas são devolvidas ao morador do andar superior, ele é encontrado vivendo todos esses dias na habitação do vizinho. E mesmo que o outro (o dono da casa) não perca nada com isso, pois ele não teria construído em nenhum caso, ainda assim, o morador do andar superior se beneficia; pois, se não fosse por esta casa, ele não teria um lugar para morar. E R. Yehudah sustenta que, se um se beneficia do outro e o outro não perde nada, o primeiro é (no entanto) responsável.] Em vez disso, o morador do andar superior constrói a casa e o andar superior, e ele passa o telhado no andar superior e habita em casa até que ele recupere suas despesas. [Ele mora na câmara baixa, e ele não é considerado um beneficiado por outro, pois sua parte superior está pronta para ele morar. E a outra (o dono da casa) não perde nada, pois não a teria construído. em qualquer evento.]
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Metzia
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Metzia
Rabbi Judah says: “He would then [after being reimbursed] have been dwelling on his fellow’s property and he should [therefore] pay him rent. Rather the owner of the upper room should rebuild both the house below and the upper room and put a roof on the upper room, and live in the house below until the other repays him what he has spent.”
Mishnah three continues to deal with a situation in which one person owns the bottom story of a house and another owns the top story, and the house collapses. In the scenario in this mishnah the owner of the bottom story refuses to rebuild his share, thereby preventing the owner of the top story from rebuilding his share.
Mishnah four deals with a case similar to that in mishnah three, except instead of a house here one person owns an underground olive press and another person owns a garden planted above the olive press, and the olive press collapses.
In the scenario in our mishnah after the entire house fell, the owner of the upper room wants to rebuild it so that he can return to live there, but the owner of the bottom story refuses to rebuild his share, thereby preventing the former from rebuilding his share. According to the opinion in section one, the owner of the upper room may rebuild the bottom story and live in it until its proper owner repays him for his expenses. Once the bottom story is rebuilt the owner of the upper room will be able to rebuild his share and live there.
According to Rabbi Judah, in this scenario it would turn out that the owner of the upper room had lived on the property of the owner of the bottom story without paying him rent. After all, at this point the upper room no longer existed and its owner therefore could not have lived there. Although the owner of the lower story should have rebuilt the house, he was not obligated to rebuild it and let the owner of the lower story live there for free.
Rather the owner of the upper room should rebuild the entire house, including the upper room, but live in the bottom story until it owner repays him for his costs. In this way the owner of the lower story could not claim from him rent, since while he was living there he had the upper room at his disposal.