cellio: (talmud)
[personal profile] cellio
The g'mara is discussing what is and isn't included in a sale by default. A mishna on the previous page says that when you sell a house it doesn't automatically include your outside store-rooms (even if there's a door to the house) or your fenced-in parapet. This principle is then applied to fields -- if a man sells a field, under what circumstances might he have not sold the entire thing? (For instance, if he is sloppy in specifying borders?) The g'mara advises one who intends a complete sale to include the words "I have not reserved from this transfer for myself anything" in the paperwork.

We then get an anecdote: a man said to another "I will sell you the land of Hiyya's". There were two pieces of land that were called Hiyya's; R. Ashi said he sold one piece of land with that declaration. If he had said "lands" there is a minimum of two (enough in this case, but not if Hiyya had three fields). If he says "all the lands" it includes all the lands but not gardens and orchards. If he says "all the fields" it includes gardens and orchards but not houses and slaves. Only if he says "my property" does it then include houses and slaves. (61b-62a)

(I would have thought "land" to be the more general term compared to "field", but apparently not.)

(no subject)

Date: 2009-10-22 02:51 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] byronhaverford.livejournal.com
Re: land vs. field

Perhaps the translation is necessarily imprecise (don't get me started on "ani l'dodi v'dodi li").

(no subject)

Date: 2009-10-23 03:18 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] zevabe.livejournal.com
I also thought "well perhaps Aramaic will be more clear on this point". So I looked. Very end of 61b: Ara'a (aleph resh ayin aleph) is one piece of land, and my inclination would be to say this is related to aretz. The ayin is in place of the tzaddi, and then a final aleph. The other words used are unfamiliar to me. I could consult a dictionary at some other time.

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags