Bava Batra 54a — the Talmud in English

This man ![](pamud.bmp "

Exact page location")

who threw turnips into the crevices of the earth of a convert, [the one who sows turnips in the crevices of a convert’s field] and did not cover them with soil in the manner of sowers, and even though the turnip grew and took root in the ground after some time,

[one who planted turnips in the crevices of a convert’s field and did not cover them with earth in the manner of those who sow, and although the turnip subsequently grew and took root in the ground,]

this is not possession!

And we explain:

What is the reason?

For

at the time when he threw

the turnips,

there was no improvement,

whereas

now that it is improving, it is improving by itself [at the time when he placed the turnips, he did not make any improvement in the ground, and after some time, when the ground improved, the improvement was by itself].

[at the time that he planted the turnips, he did not make any improvement in the ground; and later, when the ground improved, the improvement occurred on its own].

Shmuel said:

This man who strips a palm tree [removes branches from a palm tree]:

[removes branches from the date palm]:

If he did so

with the intention of the palm tree [so that the palm tree would grow, for stripping is to a palm tree like pruning is to a vineyard]—

[so that the date palm would grow, as pruning benefits a date palm like pruning a vineyard]—

he acquires

the palm tree.

But if he did so

with the intention of the animals [with the intention of his animals,]

in order to feed them the branches—

he does not acquire it.

What are the circumstances,

that is, how can we know what his intention was, so that he will not claim and say, “I intended for the sake of the palm tree”?

If

he removed from this side and from that side [if he removed branches from all sides of the palm tree], then we attribute to him that

[if he removed branches from all sides of the date palm], then we presume that he intended

he intended for the sake of the palm tree,

because this is the customary practice for the benefit of the palm tree; but if he stripped

all from one side [from one side alone] of the palm tree, then certainly he stripped only

[from only one side] of the date palm, then certainly he pruned only

with the intention of the animals,

because one who does so damages the tree, exposing it entirely on one side, and necessarily his entire intention is for the animals, while he is not concerned with the benefit of the tree.

And

further

Shmuel

said:

This man who gathers twigs [cleans and purifies the field of sticks and harmful weeds]:

[cleans and purifies the field of twigs and harmful weeds]:

If he did so

with the intention of the land [for the benefit of the ground],

so that it would be easy to plow—

he acquires

the field.

But if he did so

with the intention of the wood [for the sake of the wood that he gathers]—

[for the sake of the wood that he gathers]—

he does not acquire it,

for this is nothing but gathering produce, which is not possession.

What are the circumstances,

that is, how can we know what his intention was?

If

he removed

both

large

ones and

small

ones [large and small pieces of wood], then we attribute to him that he did so

with the intention of the land;

but if

he removed the large ones and left the small ones [he takes the large ones fit for burning and leaves the small ones], he did so only

[he took the large pieces fit for burning and left the small ones], he did this only

with the intention of the wood,

because he needs it for burning.

And

further

Shmuel

said:

This man who removes a mound [removes obstacles and levels the surface of the ground] in a field that has not yet been plowed: if he did so

[removes obstacles and levels the surface of the ground] from a field that has not yet been plowed: if he did this

with the intention of the land,

in order that it be easy to plow, so that the plow would not strike against it and break—

he acquires it.

But if he did so

with the intention of a threshing floor [to make a threshing floor there, to thresh grain there],

[to make a threshing floor there, in order to thresh grain there],

he does not acquire it,

because the field is not designated for making a threshing floor there, and in the end he will ruin it and dismantle it.

What are the circumstances,

that is, how can we know what his intention was?

He took a mound and threw it into a hollow [he took the high mound and threw it into the depression in the ground],

and it emerged that he leveled the entire ground; then we attribute to him that he did so

with the intention of the land

and so that the plow would not be delayed.

But

a mound into a mound and a hollow into a hollow [a mound into a mound and a hollow into a hollow],

he widens the mound itself so that it will not be so upright, and likewise arranges the hollow itself so that it will be smooth, and it emerges that the mounds and hollows remain in the field—

with the intention of a threshing floor,

because it is fit for beating wheat there and is not fit for plowing.

And

further

Shmuel

said:

This man who opened water in the land [opened an opening for water from the river so that it would enter the field]: if

[he opens an opening for water from the river so that it will enter the field]: if

with the intention of the land

to water the field—

he acquires it.

But

with the intention of fish [so that the fish would be caught],

[so that the fish would be caught],

he does not acquire it.

What are the circumstances,

that is, how can we know what his intention was?

If

he opened two openings, one bringing in and one taking out [he opened two openings, one for entry and the other for exit]—

[he opened two openings, one for entry and the other for exit]—

with the intention of fish,

because if he intended to water the field, he would have made only one opening, and the field would have been watered, while the fish would also have been caught by themselves.

But if he opened

one opening

alone—

with the intention of the land.

There was an incident involving

a certain woman who ate from a palm tree by stripping it for thirteen years. A certain man came and plowed a little beneath it; he came before Levi—and some say, before Mar Ukva—and he placed it in his possession.

She came and cried out before him. He said to her: What can I do for you!?

For

it

was not possession for you in the manner in which people take possession! [An incident involving a woman who had been gathering branches from one side of a palm tree left by a convert for thirteen years; and one man came and plowed a little beneath the palm tree—which benefits the tree like plowing for sowing, in order to acquire it through this—and that man came before Levi, and some say before Mar Ukva, and the sage placed the palm tree in his possession; and that woman came and cried out before him because he had placed the palm tree in the possession of the other man; and he answered her: “What can I do for you? You did not take possession in the manner in which people do when they act with the intention of the palm tree, for you gathered only from one side of the palm tree, and it appears that you gathered for the animals,” as explained above concerning “This man who strips a palm tree”].

[There was an incident involving a woman who had gathered branches from one side of a date palm left by a convert for thirteen years. A certain man came and plowed a little beneath the date palm—an action that benefits the tree like plowing benefits sowing, so that he could acquire it through this act. That man came before Levi, and some say before Mar Ukva, and the sage placed the date palm in his possession. The woman came and cried out before him because he had placed the date palm in the possession of the other man. He answered her: What can I do for you!? You did not establish a presumption of ownership in the manner in which people do so when acting with the intention of improving the date palm, because you gathered only from one side of the date palm, indicating that you gathered for the animals], as explained above concerning “this one who pruned a date palm.”

Rav said:

One who engraves a figure

of an animal or bird [which is an important drawing]

in the property of a convert [on the walls of his house]—

[on the walls of the convert’s house]—

acquires

the house;

And from where do we know that Rav said this?

For

behold,

Rav acquired Rav’s garden only through a figure, [for Rav acquired the garden that was adjacent to his bet-midrash—which had been part of the estate of a convert—only through a figure that he engraved in it].

[as Rav acquired the garden adjacent to his beit-midrash—which had been part of a convert’s estate—only by means of a figure that he drew in it].

It was stated: A field

of a convert

bounded by its boundaries [a field that has a boundary on all four sides],

and it is designated for plowing:

Rav Huna said in the name of Rav: Once he struck it with one hoe-blow [he gave one blow with a hoe into the ground and dug into it a little], and that is a little plowing,

[he struck the ground once with a hoe and dug into it slightly], which is a small amount of plowing,

he acquired

it

in its entirety.

And Shmuel said: He acquired only the place of his hoe-blow.