Bava Batra 71a — the Talmud in English

We teach it inversely,

we state their words in the opposite manner: it is the judges of the Exile who hold like Rava, that he collects only half.

Mishna:

This Mishna is a continuation of the preceding Mishna, and initially explains the law concerning one who sold a field to his fellow: what is included in the sale of the field, and what is not.

And subsequently the Mishna explains the distinction between one who sells a field and one who gives the field as a gift, or consecrates it [and likewise one who inherits it, or acquires it from ownerless property], for they acquire everything.

A. One who sells a field to his fellow and says to him that he is selling him everything that is within it does not sell him as part of this

neither the pit

that is in it,

nor the winepress

in which wine is made,

nor the dovecote

of the doves,

whether

the pit, the winepress, and the dovecote were

ruined or inhabited.

And he must

the seller

acquire for himself

by purchasing from the buyer

a way

through his field sold to the buyer, so that he will be able to reach the pit, the winepress, and the dovecote,

the words of Rabbi Akiva.

And the Sages say: He need not

acquire a way for himself in order to reach them, since a person reserves a way for himself, and does not sell his entire field completely.

And Rabbi Akiva concedes when he said to him

I hereby sell you the field and everything that is within it

except for these

[the pit, the winepress, and the dovecote],

that he need not acquire a way for himself.

B.

And if the owner of the field did not sell his field, but only

sold them

the pit, the winepress, and the dovecote as such

to

a

different

person, Rabbi Akiva says: The buyer need not

the buyer

acquire a way for himself

from the owner of the field, because included in the sale of the pit, the winepress, and the dovecote, he also sold him the way to them.

And the Sages say: He must

the buyer of them

acquire a way for himself

to them from the owner of the field, since he sold him only them and did not sell him a way.

And now the Mishna continues and states a general rule concerning all the things that we taught in all the Mishnayot of this chapter that are not sold: this applies only to a sale, but not to a gift or to consecration, and not to inheritance or to acquiring an ownerless field:

C.

When are these matters said,

what we taught throughout this chapter, that there are things that are not sold as part of the field

With regard to one who sells.

But with regard to one who gives a gift

he gives all of it,

and even the things that are not included in it, such as a grafted carob tree and a sycamore stump, and a pit, a winepress, and a dovecote, because everyone who gives a gift gives generously, more than necessary.

The brothers who divided

the field that they inherited from their father among themselves

acquired the field; they acquired all of it,

since they divided it in this manner among themselves, so that each one completely withdraws from his brother’s share.

One who takes possession of the property of a convert,

who died without heirs, and it is ownerless

if he took possession of the field, he took possession of all of it.

One who consecrates the field

has consecrated all of it,

everything that is within it, since he consecrates generously.

Rabbi Shimon

disagrees and

says: One who consecrates the field

has not consecrated

with it the other things that are not sold with it, because one who consecrates a field does not consecrate more than what the seller sells,

but

he consecrated with it only

the grafted carob tree and the sycamore stump

[even though they are not sold with it], for the reason that will be explained in the Gemara,

Gemara:

And the Gemara discusses the distinction that we taught in the Mishna between a sale and a gift:

What is different with a sale,

that he did not sell all of it,

and what is different with a gift,

that he gave all of it?

Yehuda ben Nekosa explained before Rabbi: This one,

the giver,

explained

in his words that he was giving everything,

and this one,

the seller,

did not explain

that he was selling everything.

And the Gemara is astonished at his words:

This one,

and did we indeed teach in the Mishna

this one explained and this one did not explain!?

But in the Mishna

this one did not explain, and this one did not explain, is it not so!

For the tanna stated his words anonymously and taught both of them in the same language.

Rather,

the Gemara explains that this is the distinction:

This one,

the giver, whose way is to give generously, if he wanted to reserve something for himself,

he should have explained

his reservation, and since he did not reserve it explicitly, he lost it.

And this one,

the seller, who does not sell generously, but sells out of pressure,

did not have to explain

that he was reserving for himself the things that are not included in the field; therefore, he did not lose by not explaining in his words that he was not selling them.

And the Gemara brings an incident involving

a certain

man

who said to them,

he instructed the members of his household to give his fellow a gift, and said as follows:

“Give so-and-so a house that holds one hundred

barrels,”

one house from among my houses that has an area capable of holding one hundred barrels.

It was found that it held one hundred and twenty.

Among his houses there was no house whose area held only one hundred barrels; rather, a house larger than that was found, which held one hundred and twenty barrels. And now it must be considered whether his fellow will acquire the entire house, or perhaps they will give him only part of the house, with an area capable of holding one hundred barrels.

Mar Zutra said:

Only an area for

one hundred

barrels

did he say

to give

him.

But a house having an area for

one hundred and twenty, he did not say to him,

and his fellow will receive only part of the area of the house, and not all of it.

Rav Ashi said: Did we not learn: When are these matters said

with regard to one who sells, but with regard to one who gives a gift

he gives all of them.

Apparently, one who gives,

one who gives

a gift

gives generously.

And if so,

here too, one who gives a gift

gives generously.

And he intended to give him a complete house and not part of a house; therefore, they will give him the entire house.

We learned in the Mishna:

“One who consecrates the field”

“has consecrated

all of it.”

Rav Huna said: Even though the Sages said

[below, 81a], that

one who acquires two trees within his fellow’s

field has not acquired the land

adjacent to the trees and between them, and likewise he did not acquire a right to the land of the trees themselves; therefore, if the trees die, he has no right to plant other trees there in their place.

But if

a person sold

a

field and reserved

for himself

two trees before him

he has land

around the trees and between them, for this land he did not sell, but reserved it for himself as part of the two trees that he reserved for himself.

And the Gemara explains that Rav Huna’s novel teaching is not according to the words of the Sages, because according to them it is obvious that the seller reserves the land for himself, since they hold that a person who sells a field sells begrudgingly. Rather, Rav Huna’s novel teaching applies even according to Rabbi Akiva:

And even according to Rabbi Akiva, who says: A seller sells generously,

here he does not sell also the land surrounding the trees, because

this applies

when he sells generously all the surrounding land,

with regard to a pit and a cistern, for they do not damage the land,

since the pit and cistern that the seller reserves for himself will not ultimately damage the buyer’s land, and the seller does not fear that the buyer will demand of him in the future to remove the pit and cistern so that they will not damage the land he acquired; therefore, he does not reserve any portion of the surrounding land for himself.