The Book of Introduction to the Science of the Mishnah and Talmud

On the Reasons for the Differences between the Transmitters of the Mishnah and the Transmitters of the Talmud

We say that there are ten reasons.

The first reason involves when a tradition may come down to us in two different versions, one prohibiting and the other permitting. One of the transmitters conveys it in a particular manner, and the other in another way. Therefore, they do not mutually exclude each other, since their manners [of transmission] are different. As they say: “A tenant can give testimony.” But they [also] said: “It has been taught: A tenant cannot give testimony.” But their saying: “A tenant can give testimony” refers to the situation in which there is no produce on the landed estate about which the testimony is given, while the saying: “A tenant cannot give testimony” refers to a [different] case, in which there is produce on the landed estate, and he cultivates it. By this means they reconciled these two traditions, as they said: “There is no contradiction. This refers to the case where there is no produce on the land, and that refers to the case when there is produce on the land.”

Or maybe the tradition comes down to us in two different versions, one praising and the other censuring. As, [for example], when they say: “He who says amen after his blessings is praiseworthy” and: “He who says amen after his blessings is reprehensible.” But the praise refers to the blessing “who builds Jerusalem,” and the censure refers to the rest of the blessings, as they say: “There is no contradiction. This refers to ‘who builds Jerusalem,’ and that refers to the rest of the blessings.”

Sometimes the transmission of one and the same transmitter diverges, resulting in two versions that do not mutually exclude each other, like their saying in the Talmud [ . . . ]:

They were asked: If someone sold all of his property, what is [the ruling concerning] retracting? R. Judah said: Rav said: If he recovers, he can retract. But sometimes R. Judah said: Rav said: If he recovers, he cannot retract. These do not contradict each other, but this one refers to when the money is still there, and that one refers to when he paid his debt with that money. [b. Bava Batra 149a]

It follows in this respect the way of reconciling “two passages that negate each other.”