Gittin 96

(ויקרא כה, טו) במספר שני תבואות ימכר לך

where it says, According to the number of years of the crops he shall sell unto thee.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXV, 15. This indicates that, at the time of the Jubilee, the crops were sold, not the land. ');">¹</span>

מתניתא דתניא בכור נוטל פי שנים בשדה החוזרת לאביו ביובל

A Baraitha, as it has been taught: A firstborn son receives a double portion of a field which [was due to] be restored to his father at the Jubilee.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A firstborn takes a double portion only of property which was actually in possession of the father at the time of death, not of that which is to accrue subsequently. If, therefore, he takes a double portion of this field, it shows that his father, in spite of having sold it, was still reckoned as owner. ');">²</span>

אמר אביי נקטינן בעל בנכסי אשתו צריך הרשאה

Abaye said: We have it on tradition that a husband [before going to law] about property belonging to his wife requires authorization from her.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because although he owns the produce (v. Glos. s.v. Mulug), this is not equivalent to owning the land itself. ');">³</span>

ולא אמרן אלא דלא נחית אפירי אבל נחית אפירי מיגו דמשתעי דינא אפירי משתעי דינא אגופא:

This, however, is the case only if the suit does not concern the produce. But if the suit concerns the produce, while he is putting forward claims to the produce he can put forward claims to the land itself as well.

<br><br><big><strong>הדרן עלך השולח:</strong></big><br><br>

<b><i>MISHNAH</i></b>. COMPENSATION FOR DAMAGE<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. Ex. XXII, 4. ');">⁴</span>

מתני׳ <big><strong>הניזקין</strong></big> שמין להן בעידית ובעל חוב בבינונית וכתובת אשה בזיבורית ר"מ אומר אף כתובת אשה בבינונית

IS PAID OUT<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'they value'. ');">⁵</span>

אין נפרעין מנכסים משועבדים במקום שיש נכסי' בני חורין ואפילו הן זיבורית

OF [PROPERTY OF] THE BEST QUALITY, A CREDITOR OUT OF LAND OF MEDIUM QUALITY, AND A WOMAN'S <i>KETHUBAH</i> OUT OF LAND OF THE POOREST QUALITY. R. MEIR, HOWEVER, SAYS THAT A WOMAN'S <i>KETHUBAH</i> IS ALSO PAID OUT OF MEDIUM [QUALITY LAND]. PAYMENT CANNOT BE RECOVERED FROM MORTGAGED PROPERTY WHERE THERE ARE FREE ASSETS AVAILABLE, EVEN IF THEY ARE ONLY LOWEST GRADE LAND. PAYMENT FROM ORPHANS CAN BE RECOVERED ONLY FROM LOWEST GRADE LAND. INDEMNIFICATION FOR PRODUCE CONSUMED<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [If A wrongfully acquires a field from B and sells it to C who was unaware that it was stolen and C spends money on improving it and a crop is produced, B may come and seize the field, crop and improvements, after paying C his costs in connection with the improvements. B is then entitled to recover from A the price he paid him for the field even from A's mortgaged property, but the value of the crop and increased value of the field due to the improvements only from A's unmortgaged property.] ');">⁶</span>

אין נפרעין מנכסי יתומין אלא מן הזיבורית

AND FOR THE BETTERMENT OF PROPERTY [DURING WRONGFUL TENURE] [AND PAYMENT] FOR THE MAINTENANCE [BY A MAN'S HEIRS] OF HIS WIDOW AND DAUGHTERS<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Keth. 52b. ');">⁷</span>

אין מוציאין לאכילת פירות ולשבח קרקעות

IS NOT ENFORCED FROM MORTGAGED PROPERTY, TO PREVENT ABUSES.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'for the good order of the world'. [This refers to all the rulings given in this Mishnah and supplies the connecting link between this chapter and the preceding one, as well as the reason for its inclusion in this tractate (v. Tosaf).] ');">⁸</span>

ולמזון האשה והבנות מנכסים משועבדין מפני תיקון העולם

THE FINDER OF A LOST ARTICLE CANNOT BE REQUIRED TO TAKE AN OATH, TO PREVENT ABUSES.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'for the good order of the world'. [This refers to all the rulings given in this Mishnah and supplies the connecting link between this chapter and the preceding one, as well as the reason for its inclusion in this tractate (v. Tosaf).] ');">⁸</span>

והמוצא מציאה לא ישבע מפני תיקון העולם:

<b><i>GEMARA</i></b>. [COMPENSATION&nbsp;… PROPERTY OF THE BEST QUALITY.] Is this only an ordinance to prevent abuses?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., is its sanction only Rabbinic? ');">⁹</span>

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> מפני תיקון העולם דאורייתא היא דכתיב (שמות כב, ד) מיטב שדהו ומיטב כרמו ישלם

It derives from the Scripture, as it is written, The best of his field and the best of his vineyard he shall pay!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XXII, 4. ');">¹⁰</span>

אמר אביי לא צריכא אלא לרבי ישמעאל דאמר מדאורייתא בדניזק שיימינן קמ"ל מפני תיקון העולם שיימינן בדמזיק

— Abaye replied: This statement holds good only if we take the view of R. Ishmael who said that according to the Torah the assessment is made on the property of the claimant of damage;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., he can claim only property of the same quality as the best of his own, even if this is not equal to the best of the defendant's. ');">¹¹</span>

מאי רבי ישמעאל דתניא מיטב שדהו ומיטב כרמו ישלם מיטב שדהו של ניזק ומיטב כרמו של ניזק דברי רבי ישמעאל רע"א לא בא הכתוב אלא לגבות לניזקין מן העידית וק"ו להקדש

we are then told here that to prevent abuses<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The abuse to be prevented is explained lower down. ');">¹²</span>

ולר' ישמעאל אכל שמנה משלם שמנה אכל כחושה משלם שמנה אמר רב אידי בר אבין הכא במאי עסקינן כגון שאכלה ערוגה בין הערוגות ולא ידעינן אי כחושה אכל אי שמנה אכל דמשלם ליה ממיטב

we make the assessment on the property of the defendant. What statement of R. Ishmael is referred to? — As it has been taught: 'The best of his field and the best of his vineyard he shall pay': [that is to say,] the best of the field of the claimant and the best of the vineyard of the claimant.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The meaning of this is discussed presently. ');">¹³</span>

אמר רבא אילו ידעינן דכחושה אכל משלם כחושה השתא דלא ידעינן משלם שמנה המוציא מחברו עליו הראיה אלא אמר רב אחא בר יעקב

So R. Ishmael. R. Akiba said: The whole purpose of the text is to allow compensation for damage to be recovered from the best property [of the defendant]: and all the more so in the case of the Sanctuary.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' B.K. 6b. This is explained lower down. ');">¹⁴</span> Now according to R. Ishmael,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who apparently says that according to Scripture damage is to be estimated in all cases as if done to the best of the claimant's land. ');">¹⁵</span> if [a man's beast] ate the vegetables from a rich bed, he [naturally] repays the value of a rich bed, but if it ate from a poor bed is he to repay the value of a rich one? — R. Idi b. Abin said: We are dealing here with a case where it ate one bed out of a number and we do not know whether it was a rich one or a poor one; in this case he repays the value of the best. Said Raba. Seeing that if where we know that it ate a poor one he repays only the value of a poor one, here, where we do not know, is he to pay the value of a rich one? Does not the onus probandi fall on the claimant? — R. Aha b. Jacob therefore suggested