Bava Batra — Daf 93a

מאי טעמא לאו משום דרובא הכי איתנהו

לא כולהו הכי איתנהו

ת"ש שור שנגח את הפרה ונמצא עוברה בצדה ואינו ידוע אם עד שלא נגחה ילדה או אם משנגחה ילדה משלם חצי נזק לפרה ורביע לולד

ואמאי לימא הלך אחר רוב פרות ורוב פרות מתעברות ויולדות והא ודאי מחמת נגיחה הפילה

התם משום דמספקא לן דאיכא למימר מקמה אתא ומביעתותא הפילה ואיכא למימר מאחורה אתא ומינגח נגחה והפילה הוי ממון המוטל בספק וכל ממון המוטל בספק חולקין

לימא כתנאי שור שהיה רועה ונמצא שור הרוג בצדו אע"פ שזה מנוגח וזה מועד ליגח זה מנושך וזה מועד לישוך אין אומרים בידוע שזה נגחו וזה נשכו רבי אחא אומר גמל האוחר בין הגמלים ונמצא גמל הרוג בצדו בידוע שזה הרגו

סברוה דרובא וחזקה כי הדדי נינהו לימא רב דאמר כר' אחא ושמואל דאמר כתנא קמא

אמר לך רב אנא דאמרי אפילו לתנא קמא עד כאן לא קאמר תנא קמא התם אלא דלא אזלינן בתר חזקה אבל בתר רובא אזלינן

ושמואל אמר לך אנא דאמרי אפילו לר' אחא עד כאן לא קאמר ר' אחא התם אלא דאזלינן בתר חזקה דהוא גופיה מוחזק אבל בתר רובא לא אזלינן

ת"ש המוכר פירות לחברו וזרען ולא צמחו ואפי' זרע פשתן אינו חייב באחריותן

מאי אפי' לאו אפילו זרע פשתן דרובא לזריעה זבני ואפ"ה לא אזלינן בתר רובא

תנאי היא דתניא המוכר פירות לחברו וזרען ולא צמחו זרעוני גינה שאין נאכלין חייב באחריותן זרע פשתן אינו חייב באחריותן רבי יוסי אומר

is not [the sale valid] because most [slaves] are [of] such [a character]? [And does not this prove that even in monetary matters,  one is to be guided by the majority rule?]  — No; all of them are such. Come and hear! [We learnt]:  [If] an ox gored a cow, and its embryo was found [dead] at its side, and it is not known whether it gave birth before it was gored  or after it was gored,  [the owner of the ox] pays half [the cost of the] damage [in respect] of the cow,  and a quarter [in respect] of the young.  [Now. if, in monetary matters, one is guided, as Rab asserted, by the majority rule,] why [does the owner of the ox only pay a quarter of the loss]? Let it be said, 'Be guided [by what] most cows [do]', and most cows conceive and give birth [to live calves] and the miscarriage must, [consequently], have been due to the goring!  — There, [the majority rule is inapplicable] because there is the uncertainty whether the [ox] approached from the front,  and the miscarriage was due to shock;  or from behind, and the miscarriage was due to goring;  [the indemnity] is, [therefore like] money of doubtful ownership, and all money the ownership of which is in doubt must be divided [between the parties concerned]. Must it be said [that they  differ on the same principles] as the [following] Tannaim? [It has been taught:] [If] an ox was grazing and a dead ox was found at its side, it must not be said, although the one is gored and the other is wont to gore, one bitten and the other wont to bite, 'It is obvious that the one gored or bit the other'. R. Aha said: [In the case of] a camel which 'covers'  among [other] camels, and a dead camel was found at its side, it is obvious that the one killed the other. Now, assuming that [the principles] of majority  and of confirmed legal status  have the same force, must it be said that Rab  is of the same opinion as R. Aha  and Samuel  is of the same opinion as the first Tanna?  — Rab can tell you: What I have said [is valid] even according to the first Tanna. For the first Tanna made his statement, there, [that the killing is not to be attributed to the butting ox], only because one is not to be guided by the principle of legal status, but one is to be guided by that of majority.  And Samuel can say: What I have said [is valid] even according to R. Aha. For R. Aha made his statement there, [that the 'covering' camel is assumed to be the killer], only because one must be guided by the principle of legal status, since it is the [camel] itself that has been confirmed in that status, [and is standing near by], but one Is not to be guided by the majority principle. Come and hear! [IF] ANYONE HAS SOLD FRUIT TO ANOTHER … AND [THE BUYER] SOWED THEM AND THEY DID NOT GROW, EVEN [IF THEY WERE] LINSEED, HE IS NOT RESPONSIBLE. Does not 'EVEN' imply. 'even linseed most of which is bought for sowing purposes'? And [does not this show that] even in such a case one is not guided by the majority principle!  This  is [a subject of dispute between] Tannaim. For it has been taught: [In the case when] one has sold fruit to another and [the buyer] sowed them and they did not grow, [if they are] garden seeds which are not eaten, he is responsible;  [if they are] linseed, he is not responsible.  R. Jose said: