Study Bava Batra folio 39B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
לית בה משום לישנא בישא; מאן דאמר בפני שנים – לית ליה דרבה בר רב הונא, ומאן דאמר בפני שלשה – אית ליה דרבה בר רב הונא?
is not subject to the prohibition of lashon hara, as it is already public knowledge. The Talmud elaborates on the suggestion that the dispute hinges upon this point: The one who says that a protest can be lodged in the presence of two people is not of the opinion that the ruling is in accordance with the opinion of Rabba bar Rav Huna and holds that even if only two people hear of a matter it will become a matter of public knowledge. Therefore, it is sufficient to protest in the presence of two witnesses. And the one who says that a protest must be lodged in the presence of 3 people is of the opinion that the ruling is in accordance with the opinion of Rabba bar Rav Huna.
לא, דכולי עלמא אית להו דרבה בר רב הונא; והכא בהא קא מיפלגי – מאן דאמר בפני שנים, קסבר: מחאה שלא בפניו לא הויא מחאה. ומאן דאמר בפני שלשה, קסבר: מחאה שלא בפניו הויא מחאה.
The Talmud rejects this suggestion: No, everyone is of the opinion that the ruling is in accordance with the opinion of Rabba bar Rav Huna, and here they disagree with regard to this: The one who says that a protest can be lodged in the presence of two people holds that a protest that is lodged not in his presence is not a valid protest. Therefore, two witnesses suffice, as they are needed to attest only to the fact that the owner protested. And the one who says that a protest must be lodged in the presence of 3 people holds that a protest that is lodged not in his presence is a valid protest. Since the protest can be lodged not in the possessor’s presence, 3 people are needed to ensure that word of the protest will reach him.