Commentary for Bava Batra 81:8
והא אחזיקי לי אמר ליה כמאן כר' יהודה ור' ישמעאל דאמרי כל בפניו לאלתר הוי חזקה לית הלכתא כוותייהו
<b><i>GEMARA</i></b>. [THE FACT OF POSSESSION IF NOT REINFORCED BY SOME PLEA OF RIGHT DOES NOT OF ITSELF CONFER A TITLE OF OWNERSHIP.] Surely this is self-evident? — [The reason for stating it is this] We might say: The land really was sold to this man, and he had a deed and has lost it, and the reason why he pleads as he does is because he thinks that if he says he bought the land he will be asked to produce the deed of sale. Let the <i>Beth din</i> then suggest to him that perhaps he had a deed and lost it, on the principle of Open thy mouth for the dumb.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Prov. XXXI, 8. ');"><sup>7</sup></span>
Rashbam on Bava Batra
What if the deed is unspecified - Because there are two versions of Rav Yosef, and there is a difference in that one implies that an unspecified deed is invalid, and the other that it is valid, we ask here, on which one do we rely in the case the deed is unspecified, he did not tell them to sit in the marketplace and outside, and he did not tell them to go and hide, is this considered a concealed gift or not. And there are commentaries that relate the question to...but I do not agree...
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Rashbam on Bava Batra
We are not concerned - for it is not concealed and therefore valid.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Rashbam on Bava Batra
We are concerned - that it is concealed and therefore we don not collect with it. But if it used to collect the gift is not returned. There was such an instance. And that is the reason that that Rav Ashi does not say that we do not collect, but that we are concerned, since it is a doubt and the land should remain where it is.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Rashbam on Bava Batra
And the Halakha is that we are concerned - We do not collect with it, and therefore he has to write within the deed: and this is what he told us: write it in the marketplace and sign it outside. And even though he did not say this, but they wrote this in the deed, it is as if he said it, for he wanted the deed to be written according to rabbinical regulations.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Rif Bava Batra
The Talmud asks what do we do if there is no (publicity) clause? Ravina says we are not concerned, Rav Ashi says we are concerned. And the Halakha is that we are concerned. Rav Hai Ga'on writes "we are not normally concerned with wills that don't include a (publicity) clause. It is an every day event that we remove assets, for it is a mitzvah at a time of death, through gifts, and transfers are completed and we are not concerned that they do not include a publicity clause". And he further wrote that "a person on his deathbed who says do not publicize this request until after I die, is not considered a concealed gift, for since it will be carried out after his death, at that time it was not concealed, for he told the witnesses that after he dies it will be revealed, and clearly it will be revealed, for he told them that after his death they should do what is in the will, and there is no need to be concerned with a concealed gift."
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy