Bava Metzia 207

איבעי לך לאתויי בדוולא

'You should have brought up the water in buckets.'

אמר רב פפא הני תרתי מתניתא קמייתא משכחת לה בין בחכרנותא בין בקבלנותא מכאן ואילך דאיתא בקבלנותא ליתא בחכרנותא ודאיתא בחכרנותא ליתא בקבלנותא:

R. Papa said: These first two Mishnahs [of this chapter] hold good in the cases of both a fixed rental lease and a percentage lease;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the statements that where it is customary to cut the grain, it may not be uprooted (IX, I), and that no allowance is made for the failing of a spring (IX, 2), are independent of whether the leaseholder pays a fixed rent or a percentage of the crops. ');">¹</span>

אם אמר לו חכור לי שדה בית השלחין זה [וכו']: ואמאי לימא ליה שמא בעלמא אמרי לך מי לא תניא האומר לחבירו בית כור עפר אני מוכר לך אע"פ שאין בו אלא לתך הגיעו שלא מכר לו אלא שמא והוא דמתקרי בית כור

but in the subsequent [Mishnahs] those which apply to a percentage lease do not apply to a fixed rental, and those that apply to a fixed rental do not apply to a percentage lease.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is explained on each Mishnah. ');">²</span>

כרמא אני מוכר לך אע"פ שאין בו גפנים הגיעו שלא מכר לו אלא שמא והוא דמתקרי כרמא פרדס אני מוכר לך אע"פ שאין בו רמונים הגיעו שלא מכר לו אלא שמא והוא דמתקרי פרדסא אלמא אמר ליה שמא בעלמא אמרי לך הכא נמי נימא ליה שמא בעלמא אמרי לך

BUT IF HE SAID, 'LEASE ME THIS FIELD WHICH REQUIRES IRRIGATION,' etc. But why so? Let him [the lessor] say to him, 'I merely defined it for you by name.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' But did not guarantee the source of irrigation. ');">³</span>

אמר שמואל לא קשיא הא דאמר ליה מחכיר לחוכר הא דאמר ליה חוכר למחכיר אמר ליה מחכיר לחוכר שמא בעלמא א"ל א"ל חוכר למחכיר קפידא

Has it not been taught: If one says to his neighbour, 'I sell you a beth <i>kor</i><span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'an area requiring a kor of seed,' fifty cubits square taking a se'ah of seed (1 kor = 30 se'ahs). ');">⁴</span>

רבינא אמר אידי ואידי דא"ל מחכיר לחוכר מדקאמר זה מכלל דקאי בגוה עסקינן בית השלחין למה ליה למימר דקאמר ליה בית השלחין כדקיימא השתא:

of land'; even if it contains only a <i>lethech</i>,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Half a kor. ');">⁵</span>

<big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> המקבל שדה מחבירו והובירה שמין אותה כמה ראויה לעשות ונותן לו שכך כותב לו אם אוביר ולא אעביד אשלם במיטבא:

it [the bargain] is fulfilled, because he sold him only a place by name; providing, however, that it is called beth <i>kor</i>. 'I sell you a vineyard,' even if it contains no vines, it is a valid sale, because he sold him only a name; providing, however, that it is called vineyard. 'I sell you an orchard,' even if it contains no pomegranates it becomes his, because he sold him only a name; providing that it was called orchard.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' B.B. 7a. ');">⁶</span>

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> ר"מ היה דורש לשון הדיוט דתניא ר"מ אומר אם אוביר ולא אעביד אשלם במיטבא

Thus we see that he can plead, 'I merely defined it by name:' so here too, let him plead, 'I merely defined it for you by name'! — Samuel replied: There is no difficulty. In the latter case the lessor stated this to the lessee; In the former, [i.e., the Mishnah] the lessee spoke thus to the lessor. If the lessor stated it to the lessee, it is mere name; if the lessee says it to the lessor, it particularizes.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., it must be a field that contains these amenities of irrigation. ');">⁷</span>

רבי יהודה היה דורש לשון הדיוט דתניא ר' יהודה אומר אדם מביא קרבן עשיר על אשתו וכן כל קרבן וקרבן שהיא חייבת שכך כותב לה אחריות דאית ליך עלי מן קדמת דנא

Rabina said: In both cases it means that the lessor stated this to the lessee. [Nevertheless,] since he states, 'THIS FIELD,' it follows that we are dealing with a case where he is standing therein; then why tell him that it is dependent on irrigation?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Surely the lessee sees that for himself! ');">⁸</span>

הלל הזקן היה דורש לשון הדיוט דתניא אנשי אלכסנדריא היו מקדשין את נשותיהם ובשעת כניסתן לחופה באין אחרים וחוטפים אותם מהן ובקשו חכמים לעשות בניהם ממזרים

Hence he must have meant, 'A field dependent on irrigation as now situated.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the water flowing direct to the field without the labour of transport. ');">⁹</span>

אמר להן הלל הזקן הביאו לי כתובת אמכם הביאו לו כתובת אמן ומצא שכתוב בהן לכשתכנסי לחופה הוי לי לאינתו ולא עשו בניהם ממזרים

<b><i>MISHNAH</i></b>. IF ONE LEASES A FIELD [AT A PERCENTAGE] FROM HIS NEIGHBOUR AND NEGLECTS IT, WE ASSESS IT HOW MUCH IT OUGHT TO PRODUCE, AND HE MUST PAY HIM [THE AGREED PERCENTAGE]. FOR THUS HE WRITES HIM, 'SHOULD I NEGLECT AND NOT TILL IT, I WILL PAY OF THE BEST.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This can obviously refer only to a lease on a percentage rental. If the rent is fixed, there is no room for computation. ');">¹⁰</span>

ר"י בן קרחה היה דורש לשון הדיוט דתניא ר"י בן קרחה אומר המלוה את חבירו לא ימשכננו יותר מחובו שכך כותב לו תשלומתא דאית לך עלי כל קבל דיכי

<b><i>GEMARA</i></b>R. Meir used to interpret common terms [of speech or writing]. For it has been taught: R. Meir said: 'If I neglect and do not till it, I will pay of the best.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., though it is not a Rabbinical enactment that this clause be stated in the conveyance, yet since it was a common practice to insert it, R. Meir paid heed to it, and gave his rulings accordingly. ');">¹¹</span>

טעמא דכתב ליה הכי הא אי לא כתב ליה הכי לא קניא והא אמר רבי יוחנן משכנו והשיב לו המשכון ומת שומטו מעל גבי בניו

R. Judah used to interpret common terms. For it has been taught: R. Judah said: A husband must bring a sacrifice of the rich for his wife, and likewise for every obligatory sacrifice of hers; because he writes thus for her [in the <i>kethubah</i>: 'I undertake] your liabilities incurred by you hitherto.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Certain sacrifices were variable, depending on their owner's financial position (v. Lev. V, 1 — 13; XII, 1-8). Now, in a strictly legal sense, every married woman is poor, since she has no proprietary rights. Nevertheless, if he is wealthy, he must bring the sacrifice of a rich person. This rendering is according to the text in our editions, and means: The husband undertakes to settle her liabilities, in respect of sacrifices (Tosaf.) incurred before marriage, e.g., for leprosy. And presumably he is certainly liable for sacrifices which she incurs after marriage, e.g., for childbirth. Rashi, quoting the Sifra, gives this reading. R. Judah said: Therefore, if he divorces her, he is free from this liability; for thus she writes (in the receipt for the settlement of her kethubah), '(I free you) from all the liabilities hitherto borne by you in respect of myself.' ');">¹²</span> Hillel the Elder<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the famous Hillel, head of the great school, Beth Hillel. So called to distinguish him from R. Hillel, an amora of the fourth century. ');">¹³</span> used to interpret common speech. For it has been taught: The men of Alexandria used to betroth<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H] the first stage of marriage, v. Glos. s.v. Kiddushin. ');">¹⁴</span> their wives, and when they were about to take them for the <i>huppah</i><span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos. ');">¹⁵</span> ceremony, strangers would come and tear them away. Thereupon the Sages wished to declare their children bastards.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Being born in adultery. ');">¹⁶</span> Said Hillel the Elder to them, 'Bring me your mother's <i>kethubahs</i>.' When they brought them, he found written therein, 'When thou art taken for the <i>huppah</i>, be thou my wife.' And on the strength of this they did not declare their children bastards.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Though normally the kiddushin effected marriage, in that the woman became forbidden to strangers as a married person. yet since the kethubahs distinctly stated that it was to be valid only when the huppah was performed, Hillel recognised the children of those unions as legitimate. V. Halevy. Doroth, I, 3, p. 103. This is an interesting foreshadowing of the modern practice which combines the kiddushin and the huppah. [It is suggested that the clause inserted by the Alexandrian Jews was mainly designed to free the husband from all obligations until actual marriage. v. Epstein. M. Jewish Marriage Contract, p. 295.] ');">¹⁷</span> R. Joshua b. Karhah interpreted common speech. For it has been taught: R. Joshua b. Karhah said: If a man makes a loan to his neighbour, he must not seize from him a pledge that is worth more than the debt;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This refers to a pledge taken after the loan, when repayment is due. ');">¹⁸</span> because he writes thus unto him:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., if the creditor returns the pledge for an appreciable length of time, it is first assessed and this statement written. ');">¹⁹</span> 'The repayment which is due to you from me shall be to the full value of this [pledge]'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hence, if it exceeded the debt, he would be receiving interest. ');">²⁰</span> Now, the reason [that he may claim the value of the pledge] is [only] because he wrote thus; hence, had he not written thus, he would have no title thereto. But did not R Johanan say: If he [the creditor] took a pledge from him, returned it to him, and then he [the debtor] died, the former may distrain it from his children?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And it is not regarded as movable property of orphans on which the creditor cannot distrain. This proves that he has a title to it even without that proviso. ');">²¹</span>