Bava Batra 109

ליעבד לי מר כאידך דשמואל דאמר שמואל לא קנה אלא מקום מכושו בלבד אמר ליה בהאי אנא כשמעתין סבירא לי דאמר רב הונא אמר רב כיון שניכש בה מכוש אחד קנה כולה

Then follow also the other ruling of Samuel, that the one who digs in it obtains only as much as he digs up. He replied: In that respect I follow our own teaching<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., that of Rab. ');">¹</span> as laid down by R. Huna in the name of Rab: As soon as he has dug up one spadeful he becomes legal owner of the whole.

שלח רב הונא בר אבין ישראל שלקח שדה מעובד כוכבים ובא ישראל אחר והחזיק בה אין מוציאים אותה מידו וכן היה ר' אבין ור' אילעא וכל רבותינו שוין בדבר

R. Huna b. Abin sent<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra p. 211, no. 10 ');">²</span> to say that if a Jew buys a field from a heathen and another Jew comes and occupies it [before he receives the deed], we do not dispossess him, and R. Abin and R. Elai and all our teachers were in agreement on this matter.

אמר רבה הני תלת מילי אישתעי לי עוקבן בר נחמיה ריש גלותא משמיה דשמואל דינא דמלכותא דינא ואריסותא דפרסאי עד מ' שנין והני זהרורי דזבין ארעא לטסקא זבינהו זביני

Rabbah said: These three rules were told me by 'Ukba b. Nehemiah the Exilarch: [one,] that the law of the Government [in civil cases] is law; [a second,] that Persians acquire ownership by forty years' occupation;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If a Persian has been in occupation of a piece of land for forty years, and a Jew then buys it from him, his title is impregnable, although according to Jewish law it would not be impregnable (v. supra 35b). The meaning, however, may also be that in Persia 40 years' occupation is required to confer a title of ownership (even on an Israelite) and not three. ');">³</span> and [a third], that if property is bought from the rich landlords<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Zaharuri (derivation uncertain) — men who paid to the Government the tax on land, the owners of which were in arrears, and so became owners of the land; or, according to others, the collectors of the land tax. As this transference of land was legal according to Persian law, Jews were allowed to buy the land from these people. ');">⁴</span>

וה"מ לטסקא אבל לכרגא לא מאי טעמא כרגא אקרקף דגברי מנח רב הונא בריה דרב יהושע אמר אפילו שערי דכדא משתעבדי לכרגא

who buy up land and pay the tax on it, the sale is valid. This applies, however, only to [land] which is transferred to the landlords on account of the land tax; if [it is sold to them] on account of the poll tax, then a purchase from them is not valid, because the poll tax is an impost on the person.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., it had to be collected from him personally and not from a distress on his property. Hence if the officials of the Government transferred his land to the Zaharuri for payment of this tax they were exceeding their powers, and the Rabbis therefore refused to recognise the subsequent purchase of such land by a Jew. [On the terms [H] (poll-tax) and [H] (land tax), as well as on the Persian law recorded here, v. Obermeyer, op. cit. p. 221, n. 3.] ');">⁵</span> R. Huna the son of R. Joshua, however, said that even barley in the jar is liable to be seized for the poll tax.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hence the Government officials would be justified in transferring the land, and the subsequent purchase by a Jew would be valid. ');">⁶</span>

אמר רב אשי אמר לי הונא בר נתן קשי בה אמימר א"כ בטלת ירושת בנו הבכור דהוה ליה ראוי ואין הבכור נוטל בראוי כבמוחזק

R. Ashi said: Huna b. Nathan told me that Amemar found it difficult [to accept this view] because if this was so it would leave no room for the double portion to which a firstborn is entitled in an inheritance,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XXI, 17. ');">⁷</span> since all [bequeathed] property would in this way become 'prospective',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since the whole of a man's property was liable to be seized by the Government on account of his poll tax, it was not actually his at the time of death, but was due to become his when he should have paid his tax. The Rabbinical rule was that the firstborn received a double portion only of the actual assets, not of those which were due to accrue later. V. infra 119a ');">⁸</span>

א"ל אי הכי אפילו טסקא נמי אלא מה אית לך למימר דיהיב טסקא ומית הכא נמי דיהיב כרגא ומית

and a firstborn does not receive a double portion in 'prospective' as in 'actual' assets. He [R. Ashi] remarked: The same reasoning would apply to the land tax also.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This also renders all assets 'prospective' instead of 'actual', and therefore there would seem to be no ground for the distinction between the land tax and the poll tax made above, which Amemar also accepts. ');">⁹</span> But how then do you get over the difficulty [in the case of the land tax]? [By supposing that] the father pays the land tax of the year before he dies. Similarly with the poll tax; [we suppose that] the father pays it [for the year] before he dies.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And therefore the property he leaves is 'actual' and not 'prospective'. ');">¹⁰</span>

אמר רב אשי אמר לי הונא בר נתן שאילתינהו לספרי דרבא ואמרו לי הלכתא כרב הונא בריה דרב יהושע ולא היא התם לאוקומי מילתיה הוא דאמר

R. Ashi further said: I questioned the scribes of Raba [on this point], and they told me that the law is in accordance with the ruling of R. Huna the son of R. Joshua.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That fields transferred for non-payment of poll tax could be bought by Jews. ');">¹¹</span> This, however, is not correct, and they only said so to put themselves in the right.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because they had themselves made out deeds of such sales. ');">¹²</span>

ואמר רב אשי פרדכת מסייע מתא וה"מ דאצילתיה מתא אבל אנדיסקי סיעתא דשמיא היא

R. Ashi further said: A man of leisure<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who does not engage in any kind of work, trade or commerce. ');">¹³</span> must assist the community [to pay its levy].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The tax imposed on it by the Government. ');">¹⁴</span>

אמר רב אסי א"ר יוחנן המצר והחצב מפסיקין בנכסי הגר אבל לענין פאה וטומאה לא כי אתא רבין אמר רבי יוחנן אפילו לפאה וטומאה

This, however, is only if the community saved him from being taxed separately;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By interceding on his behalf with the officials. As by so doing the community would increase its own burden, since it would have to make up the deficiency, it had the right to demand assistance from him. ');">¹⁵</span> but if the tax collectors [exempted him],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And did not demand any equivalent for his tax from the rest of the community. ');">¹⁶</span>

פאה מאי היא דתנן ואלו מפסיקין לפאה הנחל והשלולית

then Providence Was kind to him. R. Assi said in the name of R. Johanan: A boundary and a cistus<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H], a hard kind of date tree. ');">¹⁷</span> hedge serve as a partition in the estate of a proselyte;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So that a separate act is required for acquiring the fields on each side of the hedge or boundary. ');">¹⁸</span> not, however, for purposes of <i>pe'ah</i><span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'corner', v. Lev. XXIII, 22. ');">¹⁹</span> and uncleanness.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As explained in what follows. ');">²⁰</span> When Rabin came,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' From Palestine to Babylon. ');">²¹</span> he said in the name of R. Johanan: For purposes of <i>pe'ah</i> and uncleanness also. How does a partition affect <i>pe'ah</i>? — As we have learnt: 'These are the things which cut a field into two with respect to <i>pe'ah</i>:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So that pe'ah has to be given from the fields on each side. ');">²²</span> a river, a rivulet,