Bava Batra — Daf 124b

מספקא ליה אי הלכה כרבי מחבירו ולא מחביריו או הלכה כרבי מחבירו ואפילו מחביריו

אמר רב נחמן אמר רב אסור לעשות כדברי רבי קא סבר הלכה כרבי מחבירו ולא מחביריו

ורב נחמן דידיה אמר מותר לעשות כדברי רבי קא סבר הלכה כרבי מחבירו ואפילו מחביריו

אמר רבא אסור לעשות כדברי רבי ואם עשה עשוי קא סבר מטין איתמר

תני רב נחמן בשאר ספרי דבי רב (דברים כא, יז) בכל אשר ימצא לו פרט לשבח שהשביחו יורשין לאחר מיתת אביהן אבל שבח ששבחו נכסים לאחר מיתת אביהן שקיל ומני רבי היא

תני רמי בר חמא בשאר ספרי דבי רב בכל אשר ימצא לו פרט לשבח ששבחו נכסים לאחר מיתת אביהן וכל שכן שבח שהשביחו יורשין לאחר מיתת אביהן דלא שקיל ומני רבנן היא

אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל אין בכור נוטל פי שנים במלוה למאן אילימא לרבנן השתא שבחא דאיתיה ברשותיה אמרי רבנן לא שקיל מלוה מבעיא

אלא לרבי

ואלא הא דתניא ירשו שטר חוב בכור נוטל פי שנים בין במלוה בין ברבית מני לא רבי ולא רבנן

לעולם לרבנן ואצטריך סלקא דעתך אמינא מלוה כיון דנקיט שטרא כמאן דגביא דמיא קא משמע לן

שלחו מתם בכור נוטל פי שנים במלוה אבל לא ברבית

למאן אילימא לרבנן השתא שבחא דאיתיה ברשותיה אמרי רבנן דלא שקיל מלוה מבעיא

אלא לרבי ולרבי ברבית לא והתניא רבי אומר בכור נוטל פי שנים בין במלוה בין ברבית

לעולם רבנן היא ומלוה כמאן דגביא דמיא

אמר ליה רב אחא בר רב לרבינא איקלע אמימר לאתרין ודריש בכור נוטל פי שנים במלוה אבל לא ברבית א"ל נהרדעי לטעמייהו

דאמר רבה גבו קרקע יש לו גבו מעות אין לו ורב נחמן אמר גבו מעות יש לו גבו קרקע אין לו

אמר ליה אביי לרבה לדידך קשיא לרב נחמן קשיא לדידך קשיא

[For] he  was in doubt as to whether the halachah is in accordance [with the decision of] Rabbi [when it is in opposition to that] of his colleague,  but not [when it is opposed to that] of his colleagues,  or is the halachah in accordance [with] Rabbi [when in opposition to] his colleague and even [when he is opposed to] his colleagues. R. Nahman said in the name of Rab, 'It is forbidden to act in accordance with the decision of Rabbi,  for he holds the opinion [that] the halachah is in accordance [with] Rabbi, [when in opposition to] his colleague, but not [when he is opposed to] his colleagues.' R. Nahman in his own name,  however, said, 'It is permitted to act in accordance with the decision of Rabbi'; for he holds the opinion [that] the halachah is in accordance [with] Rabbi [when in opposition to] his colleague and even [when opposed to] his colleagues. Raba said, 'It is forbidden to act in accordance with the decision of Rabbi, but if one did act [accordingly], his action is legally valid;'  for he is of the opinion [that at the college] it was said [that they were only] inclined  [in favour of the opinion of the Rabbis]. R. Nahman learned  in the 'other books of the School of Rab':  Of all that he hath,  excludes the appreciation [of an estate] which the heirs have produced after the death of their father; but [in] the [natural] appreciation of the estate [that accrued] after the death of their father he [does] take [a double portion]. And who is [the author of this statement]? — It is Rabbi. Rami b. Hama learned in the 'other books of the School of Rab':  Of all that he hath,  excludes  the [natural] appreciation of an estate [that accrued] after the death of their father, and much less is he [entitled] to take [a double portion in] the appreciation which the heirs produced after the death of their father. And who is [the author of this statement]? — The Rabbis. Rab Judah said in the name of Samuel: A firstborn son does not take a double portion in a loan.  [According] to whom [was this statement required]?  If it is suggested, [according] to the Rabbis, [it may be retorted] if the Rabbis maintain that an appreciation which accrues to his possession  [the firstborn] takes no [double portion], is there any need [to state that he takes no double portion in] a loan?  — But [the statement was required according] to Rabbi. Who, then, was the author of] what has been taught. 'If they inherited a bond of indebtedness, the firstborn takes a double portion both in the loan and in the interest'? Neither Rabbi nor the Rabbis!  This statement  may, indeed, be required [according] to [the view of] the Rabbis,  [for] it might have been assumed [that, in the matter of] a loan, since he is in possession  of the bond, [the debt] is regarded as collected, hence [the law] had to be stated. [A message] was sent from Palestine:  a firstborn takes a double portion in a loan, but not in [its] interest.  [According] to whom [is this law]?  If it is suggested [that it is according] to the Rabbis, [it may be retorted:] If the Rabbis maintain that [in] an appreciation which accrues to his possession [the firstborn is] not to take [a double portion], is there any question as to [whether he takes a double portion in] a loan?  — But [the statement is according] to Rabbi. [Does] not [the firstborn, however, according] to Rabbi [take a double portion] in the interest [also]? Surely it was taught: Rabbi said: A firstborn takes a double portion both in a loan and in [its] interest! — This is really [in accordance with] the Rabbis, but a loan [is regarded] as collected. R. Aha b. Rab said to Rabina: Amemar [once] happened to come to our place, and gave the following exposition: A firstborn takes a double portion in a loan but not in [its] interest. He said to him: The [scholars] of Nehardea follow their [own] view;  for R. Nahman said:  [If] land was collected [for the debt, the firstborn] has no [double portion],  [if] money was collected he has [it],  but Rabbah said: [If] money was collected he has no [double portion],  [if] land was collected, he has. Abaye said to Rabbah: Following  you there is a difficulty; following  R. Nahman there is a difficulty. Following you there is [this] difficulty: