About this episode
Today's daf is sponsored by Jason, Erica, and Raquel in honor of their mother, Patty Belkin's birthday. "Wishing a wonderful birthday to our amazing mother!" Today's daf is sponsored by Judi Felber in honor of the 3rd yahrzeit of her mother, Yocheved bat Zvi and Sara. One source is brought to support Shmuel's position that if a buyer bought an item that has two main purposes and wasn't specific about with what intent he/she bought the item, if it is unusable for that use, the sale cannot be canceled. But this proof is rejected. Is this debate between Rav and Shmuel based on a tannaitic debate? Even though at first it seemed to be, this suggestion is rejected. Our Mishna is brought to prove Shmuel's position, but this suggestion is rejected as well, as our Mishna can be explained as Rav's position and a different braita has a tannaitic position that corresponds to Shmuel's opinion. If the seller needs to compensate the buyer for seeds that did not grow, does the seller need to reimburse the buyer for expenses incurred by the buyer for planting the seeds?