Commentary for Bava Batra 144:13

אמר רבה בר בר חנה אמר ריש לקיש חרוב המורכב וסדן השקמה באנו למחלוקת רבי מנחם (בר) יוסי ורבנן

In contrast to this, R. Judah and R. Simeon compare a field which he sanctifies 'before his father dies to a field of his possession.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is the reading of Tosaf. The ordinary texts read: 'But in the case where he sanctifies the field before his father dies, R. Judah and R. Simeon do not require a verse; where they require a verse is for the case where he sanctifies it and his father dies subsequently.' As Tosaf. points out, a text certainly was required by R. Judah and R. Simeon for the first statement. The ordinary reading seems to have come in by a copyist's error from Git. 48a. ');">¹³</span> Whence do they derive this? If from the verse just quoted, I might rejoin that this justifies only the lesson drawn by R. Meir.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which is closer to the literal meaning of the verse. ');">¹⁴</span> We must therefore say that [they rule thus] because they go according to the [time of] redemption?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And this being the case, they interpret the verse accordingly. This proves that R. Simeon decides according to the time of redemption. ');">¹⁵</span> — Said R. Nahman b. Isaac: As a general rule R. Judah and R. Simeon do not go according to the time of redemption, but in this case they do so because they found a verse which they interpreted [to this effect]. 'If so' [they said to R. Meir], 'it should say, "If he sanctifies a field which he has bought which is not his possession," or even "the field of his possession". What is the force of the words, <i>Which is not of the field of his possession</i>? [It signifies] one that is not capable of becoming the field of his possession, [and we] except from the rule one that is capable of becoming the field of his possession.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The word 'of' is taken to imply 'which is not already a part of his possession, but will subsequently become such', e.g., one which will one day come to him by inheritance. ');">¹⁶</span> R. Huna said that the full-grown carob and the cropped sycamore partly come under the law of trees and partly under the law of land. They rank as trees [to the extent] that if a man sanctifies or buys two trees and one of these, the soil in between is reckoned with.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' According to the rule that three trees carry with them the ground between. ');">¹⁷</span> They rank as land to the extent that they are not included in the transfer of land sold.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Like other trees, if the vendor inserts the words, 'it and all its contents'. ');">¹⁸</span> R. Huna further said that a sheaf of two se'ahs partly comes under the law of a sheaf and partly under that of a shock. It ranks as a sheaf [to the extent] that while two sheaves can be regarded as 'forgotten',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The reference is to the rule in Deut. XXIV, 19: When thou reapest thine harvest in thy field and has forgot a sheaf in the field, thou shalt not go again to fetch it. This rule, according to the Rabbis, applied to one or two sheaves, but not to three. ');">¹⁹</span> while two with this one are not regarded as 'forgotten'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That is to say, it is treated as a sheaf on a par with the other two sheaves, the three together forming one shock. ');">²⁰</span> It ranks as a shock as we have learnt: [If a reaper forgets] a sheaf of two se'ahs, it is not regarded as forgotten.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because it is considered as being no longer a sheaf but a shock. ');">²¹</span> Rabbah b. Bar Hana said in the name of Resh Lakish: In regard to the full-grown carob and the cropped sycamore we find a difference of opinion between R. Menahem son of R. Jose and the Rabbis.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The former holding that they are not sanctified along with a field, the latter that they are. ');">²²</span>

Explore commentary for Bava Batra 144:13. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.