Bava Batra 127

ואי סלקא דעתך בסתמא קני עומקא ורומא כי גבוה עשרה טפחים מאי הוי כיון דגבוה עשרה טפחים חשיב

Now if you assume that the space below and above is transferred automatically, what difference does it make if the parapet is ten handbreadths high?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That is to say, why should a roof with a parapet be different from a roof without a parapet (which is sold with the house), unless for the fact that the purchaser does not acquire the height automatically with the house. So Rashi. V, however Tosaf., s.v. htu'. ');">¹</span> — Since the parapet is ten handbreadths high the roof is reckoned as a separate structure.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And therefore is not sold automatically with the house. ');">²</span>

א"ל רבינא לרב אשי תא שמע דאמר ריש לקיש זאת אומרת המוכר בית לחבירו ואמר לו על מנת שדיוטא העליונה שלי דיוטא העליונה שלו ואמרינן למאי הלכתא רב זביד אמר שאם רצה להוציא בה זיזין מוציא רב פפא אמר שאם רצה לבנות עלייה על גבה בונה

Rabina said to R. Ashi: Come and hear:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' An argument against R. Dimi, from the ruling of R. Papa. ');">³</span> Resh Lakish said: This shows that if a man sells an apartment to another with the stipulation that the top layer still belongs to him, the top layer does still belong to him; and we asked what was the purpose of the new rule laid down by Resh Lakish, and R. Zebid said: [In order to tell us] that if the vendor desires to let out projecting spars from the roof he may do so, and R. Papa said: [In order to tell us] that if he desires to build an upper chamber over the apartment he may do so. Now if you assume that the top layer is not transferred automatically, what does he gain by his stipulation?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since even without this the vendor would still retain possession of the roof. ');">⁴</span>

ואי ס"ד בסתמא לא קני למה לי על מנת אהני ליה על מנת דאי נפיל הדר בני לה:

— What he gains by the stipulation is the right to rebuild it if it falls in.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This right not being conveyed by the bare transfer, which relates to 'this' layer only. Hence if he desires to transfer the roof completely, he must insert the words 'depth and height'. ');">⁵</span> <b><i>MISHNAH</i></b>. [THE VENDOR OF A HOUSE DOES NOT SELL THEREWITH] A WELL OR A CISTERN,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The difference between these terms is explained in the Gemara. ');">⁶</span>

<big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> לא את הבור ולא את הדות אע"פ שכתב לו עומקא ורומא וצריך ליקח לו דרך דברי ר' עקיבא וחכמים אומרים אינו צריך ליקח לו דרך

EVEN THOUGH HE INSERTS [IN THE DEED THE WORDS] 'INCLUDING THE DEPTH AND THE HEIGHT'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the space below and above. ');">⁷</span> HE MUST, HOWEVER, BUY HIMSELF, [IF REQUIRED], THE RIGHT OF WAY [TO THE WELL OR CISTERN]. THIS IS THE RULING OF R. AKIBA, THE SAGES, HOWEVER, SAY THAT HE NEED NOT BUY THE RIGHT OF WAY. R. AKIBA [ON HIS SIDE] AGREES THAT IF THE VENDOR INSERTS [THE WORDS] EXCEPT THESE',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which, strictly speaking, are superfluous, as the well and cistern are not automatically transferred with the house. ');">⁸</span>

ומודה ר"ע בזמן שאמר לו חוץ מאלו שאין צריך ליקח דרך

HE NEED NOT BUY HIMSELF A RIGHT OF WAY. IF THE OWNER OF THE HOUSE SELLS THESE TO ANOTHER R. AKIBA SAYS THAT THE PURCHASER NEED NOT BUY A RIGHT OF WAY TO THEM, BUT THE SAGES SAY THAT HE MUST BUY IT. <b><i>GEMARA</i></b>. Rabina<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [Rabina II b. Huna, nephew of Rabina I, v. Kaplan, J., Redaction of the Babylonian Talmud, 144.] ');">⁹</span>

מכרן לאחר ר' עקיבא אומר אינו צריך ליקח לו דרך וחכ"א צריך ליקח לו דרך:

as he sat [and studied this section] asked: Is not WELL<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H] ');">¹⁰</span> identical with CISTERN?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H] ');">¹¹</span>

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> יתיב רבינא וקא קשיא ליה היינו בור היינו דות א"ל רבא תוספאה לרבינא ת"ש דתניא אחד הבור ואחד הדות בקרקע אלא שהבור בחפירה והדות בבנין יתיב רב אשי וקא קשיא ליה היינו בור היינו דות א"ל מר קשישא בריה דרב חסדא לרב אשי ת"ש דתניא אחד הבור ואחד הדות בקרקע אלא שהבור בחפירה והדות בבנין:

Said Raba Tosfa'ah to Rabina: Come and hear: It has been taught: Both 'well' and 'cistern' are excavations in the soil, only a 'well' is merely dug out,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of hard soil which does not fall in. ');">¹²</span> whereas a 'cistern' is faced with stone.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because the soil is soft. ');">¹³</span>

וצריך ליקח לו דרך דברי ר"ע וחכמים אומרים אינו צריך וכו': מאי לאו בהא קא מפלגי

R. Ashi [also] as he sat [and studied this section] asked: Is not WELL identical with CISTERN? Said Mar Kashisha the son of R. Hisda to R. Ashi: Come and hear: It was been taught: Both 'well' and 'cistern' are excavations in the soil, only a 'well' is merely dug out, whereas a 'cistern' is faced with stone. HE MUST BUY HIMSELF THE RIGHT OF WAY. THIS IS THE RULING OF R. AKIBA. THE SAGES, HOWEVER, SAY THAT HE NEED NOT. [We may assume,] may we not, that the point at issue between them is this,