Bava Batra 338

אמר להו בעלמא כותבין שובר והכא היינו טעמא דדלמא אזיל בעל חוב וטריף מיניה דלוקח ואזיל איהו וטריף לקוחות ושובר גבי לקוחות ליכא

He, [however,] said to them: Elsewhere<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the case where a bond of indebtedness was lost by a creditor. ');">¹</span> a quittance is to be written,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' for the debtor on paying his debt. ');">²</span> and [the reason why it is not written] in this case<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And on the strength of it provide the buyer with a duplicate. ');">³</span>

סוף סוף לקוחות לאו אמרי דארעא הדרי

is because the creditor<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of the seller. ');">⁴</span> might call upon, and take [the field] away from the buyer<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who bought his land from the debtor subsequent to the date of the loan. ');">⁵</span> and he<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That buyer. ');">⁶</span>

אדהכי והכי שמיט ואכיל פירי

would call upon, and seize [the fields of subsequent] buyers, while [these] buyers [would] have no quittance [to show].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The first buyer, wore he able to secure a duplicate deed on a plea of having lost the original, would, thereby, be placed in a position to form a conspiracy with the creditor to defraud subsequent buyers. ');">⁷</span> After all, however, [would] not the buyers [ultimately] return to the owner of the land?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the seller, to claim compensation for the lands seized; and he would, naturally, tell them about the quittance wherewith they could to — claim the lands of which they were robbed by the first buyer. ');">⁸</span> — In the meantime he<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The first buyer. ');">⁹</span>

אי נמי ללוקח שלא באחריות

[would be] plucking and eating the fruit, or else,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'also'. ');">¹⁰</span> [he<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The first buyer. ');">⁹</span> might seize the land] from one who has purchased [it] without security.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Such a buyer could not advance any claim for compensation against the seller. Hence he would never learn of the existence of the quittance. ');">¹¹</span>

אי הכי שטרי הלואה נמי

If so,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That provision is made against the possibility of seizing lands from buyers who are unaware of the existence of a quittance. ');">¹²</span> [the same should apply to] bonds of indebtedness also!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., why then is a quittance permitted, where a bond of indebtedness was lost? Surely it is possible that the buyers might not be aware of the existence of such a quittance. ');">¹³</span> — In that case<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The case of a loan. ');">¹⁴</span>

התם דזוזי מסיק אמרי פייסיה בעל חוב בזוזי הכא דארעא מסיק מידע ידעי דמאן דמסיק ארעא בזוזי לא מפייס

where the claim is money they<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The subsequent buyers whose lands the first buyer comes to seize. ');">¹⁵</span> assume [that] the debtor might have satisfied the claim<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'him'. ');">¹⁶</span> with money.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hence they would not part with their fields before ascertaining the position from the seller, (i.e. the debtor) and so would learn of the existence of the quittance. ');">¹⁷</span>

אמר מר חוץ מן האחריות שבו היכי כתבינן אמר רב נחמן דכתבי הכי שטרא דנן דלא למיגבי ביה לא ממשעבדי ולא מבני חרי אלא כי היכי דתיקום ארעא בידיה דלוקח

In this case<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That of a deed of sale and purchase. ');">¹⁸</span> [however] where the claim is for land, they well know that one who claims land would not be satisfied with money.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And would, therefore, allow the first buyer to take possession of their lands in the hope that, in due course, the seller might compensate him and arrange for the return to them of their property. They are not, therefore, in a hurry to go to the seller. When they ultimately learn of the existence of a quittance a considerable time has already elapsed and they lose the fruits which the first buyer had consumed in the meantime. ');">¹⁹</span> The Master had said, 'With the omission of [the clause] pledging [property]'. How [is such a deed]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which enables the holder to establish his claim upon his land and yet prevents him from seizing that of others. ');">²⁰</span>

אמר רפרם זאת אומרת אחריות טעות סופר הוא טעמא דכתב ליה הכי הא לא כתב ליה הכי גבי

to be written? — R. Nahman said: It is written as follows: 'This deed is not for the purpose of collecting thereby either from sold, or from free property but for that of establishing the land in the possession of the buyer'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That the previous owner (the seller) shall not be able to deprive him, of it by the assertion that he had never sold it to him. ');">²¹</span> Rafram said: This<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Nahman's requirement specifically to enter in the deed that it does not provide any security. ');">²²</span> proves [that the omission<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' from any deed. ');">²³</span>

רב אשי אמר אחריות לאו טעות סופר הוא ומאי חוץ מאחריות שבו דלא כתיב ביה אחריות

of the clause] pledging property [is regarded as the] scribe's error,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And is regarded as entered though the scribe had omitted it. V. B.M. 14a. ');">²⁴</span> [since] the reason [given<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Why the deed does not entitle the holder to claim compensation from the seller's lands. ');">²⁵</span> was] because such an entry<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'This deed is not etc.'. ');">²⁶</span>

ההיא איתתא דיהבה ליה זוזי לההוא גברא למיזבן לה ארעא אזל זבן לה שלא באחריות אתיא לקמיה דרב נחמן

was actually included<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'because he wrote for him thus'. ');">²⁷</span> but, [it follows], had it not been included<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'not written for him, thus'. ');">²⁸</span> he<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The holder of the deed. ');">²⁹</span>

אמר ליה לתקוני שדרתיך ולא לעוותי זיל זבנה מיניה שלא באחריות והדר זבנה ניהלה באחריות:

[could have] claimed [his compensation from the seller's lands].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., and what'. ');">³⁰</span> R. Ashi said: [The omission of the clause] pledging property [is] not [regarded as] the scribe's error; and the meaning of<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., and what'. ');">³⁰</span> 'with the omission [of the clause] pledging property' is that no such clause is entered in the deed.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'that pledging is not written in it'. ');">³¹</span>

רשב"ג אומר הנותן מתנה לחבירו והחזיר לו את השטר חזרה מתנתו וחכ"א מתנתו קיימת: מאי טעמא דרשב"ג אמר רב אסי נעשה כאומר לו שדה זו נתונה לך כל זמן שהשטר בידך

A certain woman once gave to a man money [wherewith] to buy for her [a plot of] land. He went [and] bought for her [the land] without [providing for the] security<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' He failed to arrange for the seller to pledge his landed property for the field he bought. ');">³²</span> of its tenure. She came before R. Nahman<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To complain against the unsatisfactory terms of the purchase. ');">³³</span> [who] said to the agent.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., to him', the man who acted on behalf of the woman. ');">³⁴</span>

מתקיף לה רבה אי הכי נגנב או אבד נמי

'[The woman has the right to declare]. "I sent you to improve [my position]; not to make [it] worse".<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By spending her money on unsecured property. ');">³⁵</span> Go [then], buy it [yourself] from him<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The seller. ');">³⁶</span> without security and then sell it [to the woman] with due security of tenure'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So that in case the land is ever taken away from her by a creditor of the seller or by previous buyers she will he entitled to compensation from the agent. ');">³⁷</span>

אלא אמר רבה באותיות נקנות במסירה קמיפלגי רשב"ג סבר אותיות נקנות במסירה ורבנן סברי אין אותיות נקנות במסירה

'Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel said; Where a person made a gift to his friend and [the latter] returned the deed to him, his gift [also is, thereby] returned. But the Sages said: His gift is valid.' What is Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel's reason? — R. Assi said: [Because] it<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since the gift is conveyed to the donee by means of a deed. ');">³⁸</span> is just as if [the donor] had said to the donee.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'to him'. ');">³⁹</span> 'This field is given to you for so long [a period] as the deed [remains] in your possession'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hence it returns to the donor as soon as the deed is returned to him. ');">⁴⁰</span>

ת"ר הבא לידון בשטר ובחזקה נידון בשטר דברי רבי רשב"ג אומר בחזקה

Rabbah demurred; If so,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That the donee can retain ownership of the gifts so long only as the deed remains with him. ');">⁴¹</span> [the same law should apply] also [to the case where] it<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A deed. ');">⁴²</span> was stolen or lost! — But, said Rabbah, they differ on [the question whether] 'letters'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A deed. ');">⁴²</span>

במאי קמיפלגי כי אתא רב דימי אמר באותיות נקנות במסירה קא מיפלגי

[may] be acquired by delivery.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Heb., mesirah, v. supra 76a (q.v. for notes), and Glos. ');">⁴³</span> R. Simeon b. Gamaliel holds the opinion [that] 'letters' are acquired by delivery while the Rabbis<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Sages. ');">⁴⁴</span> hold the opinion [that] 'letters' may not be acquired by delivery. Our Rabbis taught: Where a person appears in court<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'who comes to be judged', i.e., to respond to a claim that a plot of land which he Occupies is not his. ');">⁴⁵</span> with a deed<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of purchase, which X, the person who sold the land to him, received from Y, from whom he in turn bought it; pleading that, though his own name does not appear in it, he acquired ownership of the land by the act of delivery which X had performed when he handed the deed to him. [So Rashb. R. Gersh. and Rashi (Sanh. 23b) take it simply to refer to the deed of purchase which the buyer claims to have received from the seller.] ');">⁴⁶</span> and with [evidence of] undisturbed possession<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hazakah (v. Glos.). Witnesses testify that he occupied the land during the statutory period of three years required for establishing his title to it. ');">⁴⁷</span> judgment is given [on the basis of] the deed; [these are] the words of Rabbi. R. Simeon b. Gamaliel said: [Judgment is given] on [the basis of his] undisturbed possession. On what [principle] do they differ? — When R. Dimi came<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' From Palestine to Babylon. ');">⁴⁸</span> he said: They differ on [the question whether] 'letters' may be acquired by delivery.