Bava Batra 36b — the Talmud in English

And we raised an objection to it:

But can you understand it so?:

And do you think that it is possible to interpret their reasons in this way!? For if so,

according to Rabbi Akiva, why specifically a month ![](pamud.bmp "

exact page location")

even

in

one day as well

could he make nir!? And why did Rabbi Akiva require a full month at the beginning and at the end!?

Rather:

according to everyone—

both Rabbi Yishmael and Rabbi Akiva hold—

that nir does not constitute a ḥazaka; and here

in our Mishna,

the large produce and the small produce are the difference between them,

the basis of their dispute is whether he must eat the produce when it is fully grown, or whether eating the grain while it is still shahat suffices:

For Rabbi Yishmael holds: We require large produce, and only after three months is grain [such as barley, oats, and lentils] completed.

And Rabbi Akiva holds: Even if he ate the grain when it was shahat, before it had grown to its full extent, this too constitutes a ḥazaka.

The Sages taught: Nir does not constitute a ḥazaka.

And some say: This constitutes a ḥazaka.

And we explain:

Who are the “some who say”?

Rav Ḥisda said: It is Rabbi Aḥa, as it was taught:

He plowed it for one year

one year [he made nir in the field for one year , and did not sow it during that year],

and sowed it for two

years, or

he plowed it for two

years

and sowed it for one year

one year,

this does not constitute a ḥazaka.

Rabbi Aḥa says: This constitutes a ḥazaka.

Rabbi Aḥa said: I asked

I asked

all the great men of the generation, and they said to me: Nir constitutes a ḥazaka.

He said

he asked

Rav Bibi to Rav Naḥman:

A.

What is the reason of the one who says: Nir constitutes a ḥazaka?

Rav Naḥman said to Rav Bibi: It is because

a person does not

plow up his fellow’s land and remain silent,

for a person does not see his fellow making nir in his field and remain silent.

B.

And what is the reason of the one who says: Nir does not constitute a ḥazaka?

Rav Naḥman said to Rav Bibi: It is because

he says

the owner of the field: “

Let him put every tooth of the plow with which he plows into it,” that is, if only he would plow a great deal, until the teeth of the plow fall out and the soil becomes loosened; afterward I will take it and sow it myself.

meaning, if only he would plow extensively, until the teeth of the plow fall out and the soil becomes loosened; afterward I will take it from him and sow it myself.

The sons of Pum Nahara sent

a place-name

to Rav Naḥman bar Rav Ḥisda: Let our master teach us:

Whether

the nir

that a person makes for one day in a plowed field in the first and third years

constitutes a ḥazaka

as though he had established possession of it throughout that entire year,

or does it not constitute

a ḥazaka?

He said to them

Rav Ḥisda:

Rabbi Aḥa and all the great men of the generation say: Nir constitutes a ḥazaka.

Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said:

And is

greatness

there in

counting men

[and what greatness is there in counting scholars who say according to this approach]!?

But Rav and Shmuel in Babylonia, and Rabbi Yishmael and Rabbi Akiva in the Land of Israel, say: Nir does not constitute a ḥazaka,

as he proceeds to explain.

And we explain:

Rabbi Yishmael and Rabbi Akiva—

who hold that nir does not constitute a ḥazaka—

it is the Mishna

[our Mishna]; for even Rabbi Akiva is not satisfied with one day, during which he could make a furrow!

And

Rav—what is it,

where do we find that Rav said that nir does not constitute a ḥazaka?

For Rav Yehuda said in the name of Rav

concerning our Mishna:

This is the statement of Rabbi Yishmael and Rabbi Akiva,

who say that in a plowed field one month or three months suffices in the first and third years,

but the Sages

disagree with them and

say:

Its ḥazaka

of a plowed field, it too is

three years from day to day,

for according to them the reason for ḥazaka is that until three years a person is careful with his document; therefore, until he has established possession for three complete years, this is not a ḥazaka.

And behold, “

from day to day”—

from day to day”—

to exclude what?

And is it

not to exclude nir, which does not

constitute a ḥazaka!? For even one month or three months, during which he eats small produce and large produce, does not benefit him as a complete year, and certainly nir of one day is insufficient to make it equivalent to a complete year.

We further explain:

Shmuel,

who holds that nir does not constitute a ḥazaka,

what is it

[where do we find that he said so]?

For Rav Yehuda said in the name of Shmuel:

This

that we learned in our Mishna: “Rabbi Yishmael said: In what case are these words said? In a grain field. But in an orchard, if he gathered its grain, picked its olives, and gathered its summer produce, these are three years,”

is the statement of Rabbi Yishmael and Rabbi Akiva,

for Rabbi Akiva too agrees with this, just as he holds that in a plowed field one month suffices in the first and last years—

But the Sages

disagree with them and

say:

This is not a ḥazaka until he eats the produce of the year three times, and it is not a ḥazaka

until he gathers three gatherings

in three years,

and harvests

[or harvests]

three harvests and picks three olive harvests.

And we explain:

What is the difference between them,

what practical legal difference is there between the words of Rav according to the Sages and the words of Shmuel according to the Sages?

Abaye said: A young palm tree

[a young palm tree] that bears produce more than once a year—

is the difference between them,

between Rav and Shmuel according to the Sages:

According to Rav: There is never a ḥazaka except through three years, and if there is produce more than once a year, he must eat it; whereas according to Shmuel: The harvesting of three cycles of produce suffices, even if he ate three times in two years.

We learned in the Mishna:

Rabbi Yishmael said: In what case are these words said? In a grain field,

but in an orchard, if he gathered his grain, picked his olives, and gathered his summer produce, these are three years:

Abaye said:

From

the words of

Rabbi Yishmael,

who says that through three gatherings in three places in one field, this constitutes a ḥazaka for the entire field, as though he gathered throughout the entire field three times—

we may infer for the Sages:

That if

he had thirty trees

in a space of three se’a,

planted ten to a beit se’a

[so that the trees were dispersed within it, ten trees in each beit se’a]—

And

he ate ten

trees

in this year, and ten

trees

in this year, and ten in this year, this constitutes a ḥazaka

for the entire field; and although in each year he ate only the produce of one-third of the trees; for example, the ten trees that he ate from each year were dispersed throughout the entire area of the field: three trees in this beit se’a, three trees in that beit se’a, and four in the third beit se’a, as he explains below.