Bava Batra 26a — the Talmud in English

When the cover of the jug placed over the mouth of the jug moves.

When the cover of the jug resting over the mouth of the jug moves, in such a manner that the jug is resting on the wall.

The household of Bar Marion son of Ravin, when they would beat flax,

when they would beat the flax,

the chaff would go and injure people,

the chaff of the flax would go and injure people.

They came before Ravina

They came before Ravina so that he would rule the law for them.

He said to them: When we say that Rabbi Yosei concedes with regard to his own arrows, this applies only when it goes by his force. Here, it is the wind that brings it.

He said to them: What we said, that Rabbi Yosei concedes with regard to his own arrows, applies specifically when the damage comes by his force, for then it is considered as though he shot arrows into another's domain; but here, it is the wind that brings the chaff, and it is not considered to have come by his force.

Mar bar Rav Ashi raised an objection against this:

What is different from winnowing, where the wind assists him,

what is different from the labor of winnowing on Shabbat, for although the wind assists him, since the labor is performed through the wind separating the chaff from the grain, nevertheless the Torah considers him to have performed a labor and made him liable for this? It is proven from here that what the wind does through his causation is considered his action.

They said it before Marimar.

They stated this objection before Marimar.

He said to them: This is indeed winnowing

where the wind assists him.

Here it is truly similar to winnowing where the wind assists him, and what the wind pushes—the chaff of the flax—is considered his force.

And the Gemara discusses his statement:

And according to Ravina, what is different from a spark that emerges from beneath the hammer and causes damage, for which he is liable to pay?

What is different from what we learned: A spark that emerges from beneath the hammer when he strikes another piece of iron, and this spark damages another person's property—he is liable to pay. There too, the wind carried the spark, so why is this considered his action, and why is he liable to pay for it?

[And the reason the Gemara does not ask what Ravina will answer concerning the objection from winnowing where the wind assists him is that it is possible to answer that the law of Shabbat differs from the laws of damages. For with regard to Shabbat, the Torah prohibited a deliberate labor; therefore, whenever he intended that a labor be performed, even though it did not come by his force but because of the wind, the Torah made him liable for it. This is not so with regard to damages, where it must be actually by his force. But concerning a spark that emerges from beneath the hammer, which is speaking of damages, the Gemara raised its objection.]

The Gemara answers:

There, it is pleasing to him that it go,

there, in the case of the spark, it is pleasing to him that the spark travel far away so that it will not burn his house; but

here, it is not pleasing to him that it go.

Here, it is not pleasing to him that the chaff travel far away; rather, he wants it to fall onto the ground.

Mishna:

A person may not plant a tree near his fellow's field unless he distances it four cubits from it, whether vines or any tree.

Both with vines and with other trees; and the reason is explained in the Gemara.

If there was a fence between them, this one may lean against the fence from here, and that one may lean against the fence from there.

And he need not distance it four cubits, since the fence intervenes.

If roots were emerging into

the field

of his fellow, he deepens three handbreadths, so that it will not obstruct the plow.

The owner of the field may cut the roots to a depth of three handbreadths within the ground, so that the roots will not obstruct his plow.

If he was digging a cistern, a ditch, or a cave, he cuts and descends, and the wood is his.

If he wishes to dig a cistern, a ditch, or a cave, he may cut even deeper than three handbreadths, according to the needs of the cistern, ditch, and cave. And the words “the wood is his”—the Gemara explains whether it belongs to the owner of the tree or to the owner of the field into which the roots emerged.

Gemara:

A tanna taught: The four cubits that they said are for the labor of the vineyard.

The reason that he must distance it four cubits is so that his plow will not enter his fellow's field. Therefore he must distance it four cubits, so that there will be room for the plow and also for him to stand there.

Shmuel said: They taught

that he must distance it four cubits

only in the Land of Israel; but in Babylonia, two cubits.

Because their plows were shorter than those of the Land of Israel.

It was also taught likewise,

we learned this in a beraita:

A person may not plant a tree near his fellow's field unless he distances it two cubits from it.

And the Gemara infers:

But we learned in the Mishna four cubits,

for we learned in the Mishna four cubits and not two cubits,

rather, is it not in accordance with Shmuel? Learn from it.

Rather, one must necessarily answer as Shmuel did.

And there are those who present it as an objection,

there are those who learned that they first raised an objection in the study hall:

We learned:

We learned in our Mishna

A person may not plant a tree near his fellow's field unless he distances it four cubits from it. But was it not taught: two cubits?

For we learned in the beraita that two cubits are sufficient?

And concerning this he answers:

Shmuel said: It is not difficult; here it is in Babylonia, and here it is in the Land of Israel.

Rava bar Rav Hanan had these date palms

at the boundary of Rav Yosef's orchard,

he had date palms near the boundary of Rav Yosef's orchard—that is, vineyard—

birds would come, sit in the date palms, then descend into the orchard and damage it,

birds would come and sit in the date palms, and afterward descend into Rav Yosef's orchard and damage it, for they would eat from it or soil it.

He said to him: Go cut them down,

Rav Yosef said to Rava that he should cut down the date palms,

He said to him,

Rava said:

But I have distanced them,

for I distanced them four cubits, in accordance with the measure stated in the Mishna.

He said to him,

Rav Yosef said:

This applies to trees, but for vines we require more.

Four cubits are sufficient only for ordinary trees, but for vines one must distance them more, because the date palms are taller than vines, and it is easy for birds to fly from the tall trees to the vines, which are lower than them.

Rava asked him:

But we learned in the Mishna: whether vines or any tree,

and if so, how is it possible to say that with vines a measure greater than four cubits is required?

He said to him,

Rav Yosef said:

This applies to a tree beside a tree, and vines beside vines. But a tree beside vines requires more.

Specifically, when one comes to plant a tree beside a tree, or vines beside vines, it is sufficient to distance them four cubits; but if one comes to plant a tree beside vines, he must distance it more, because the tree is taller than the vines, and birds come from the tree to the vines.

He said to him,

Rava said:

I will not cut it down,

I will not cut it down, because

Rav said: A date palm that produces a kav is forbidden to cut down.

A date palm that bears a kav of dates—that is, a kav of dates grows on it—is forbidden to cut down because of “Do not destroy.”

And Rabbi Hanina said

that he himself was punished because he transgressed the prohibition of “Do not destroy”:

My son Shakh'at did not die,

my son, whose name was “Shakh'at,” did not die,

except

because

he cut down a fig tree before its time.

He cut down a fig tree before its time, that is, while it was still bearing fruit. Thus, there is also danger in cutting it down. Therefore,

Sir, if it is pleasing to him, let him cut it down.

My master, if it is pleasing to him that he cut it down, let him do so.

Rav Pappa had these date palms at the boundary of Rav Huna son of Rav Yehoshua,

he had date palms near the boundary of Rav Huna son of Rav Yehoshua.

He went and found him digging and cutting his roots.

Rav Pappa went and found Rav Huna son of Rav Yehoshua digging and cutting the roots of the tree that had spread into his field.

He said to him: What is this?

Rav Pappa asked Rav Huna why he was doing this.

He said to him,

Rav Huna said to Rav Pappa: This

we learned: If

roots emerge into his fellow's [field], he deepens three [handbreadths], so that the plow will not be obstructed.

Therefore he was cutting the roots.

He said to him: This applies to three,

Rav Pappa said to Rav Huna son of Rav Yehoshua: It is written that he may deepen three handbreadths, but no more, whereas

you, you are digging more.

My master, you are digging more than three handbreadths and cutting there.

He said to him: I am digging cisterns, ditches, and caves,

Rav Huna answered him that he was digging cisterns, ditches, and caves, and in this case it is permitted to cut even at a depth greater than three handbreadths, according to the needs of the cistern.

For we learned: If he was digging a cistern, a ditch, or a cave, he cuts and descends, and the wood is his.

And it does not state specifically three handbreadths, indicating that it includes more than three handbreadths as well.

Rav Pappa said: I presented all of them to him, but I was unable to overcome him!

Rav Pappa said: I would raise and bring all the proofs to Rav Huna that he should not cut, but I was unable to defeat him, for Rav Huna would reject the proofs.