Bava Batra 71 – Sale, Gift, Consecration (Civil)

One who sells a field without specifying what is included in the sale has not sold the water pit, the wine press, and the dovecote in this field because these are separate properties in their own right. Those items are not included in the sale, even if they are in disuse at the time of the sale.

When one gives the primary item as a gift, he gives it all, even items not included in the case of sale. A gift recipient is embarrassed to ask about details, and it is on the giver to withhold any items he wants to keep.

One who consecrates a field is generous like a giver. Rabbi Shimon says he is like a seller.

Art: Pressing the Grapes - Florentine Wine Celler by John Singer Sargent

Bava Batra 70 – Returning a Deposit (Civil)

It has been established that one who accepts a deposit in the presence of witnesses is not required to return it in the presence of witnesses.

What is the rule if one records making his deposit in a document, and then the custodian tells him, "I have already returned it to you?" Do we say that if the custodian wished to lie, he could have stated that the deposit suffered an unavoidable mishap, in which case he would have been believed? Therefore, we believe him based on the "why would he lie?" argument?

Or can the depositor ask, "Then why do I have this document in my hands?" "Why would he lie?" is not applicable?

Perhaps the custodian retrieved the document because he knew that he could claim an unavoidable mishap and would be believed. Therefore, he is believed now.

Art: Portrait of Henry Pelham Clinton Holding a Document by Henry Nelson O'Neil

Bava Batra 69 – Sale of a Field (Civil)

One who sells a field without specifying what is included in the sale has sold the stones for the use of the field, such as to hold the harvested sheaves. He has also sold the reeds in the vineyard inside that field, used to support the vines. He has sold produce attached to the ground, even if it is ready to be cut. He has sold the carob tree that has not been grafted and the virgin sycamore (planetree) that has not been pruned. All these items either serve the field or aren't significant in their own right.

If he said, "I am selling you the field and all that is contained therein," he also sold cut harvest. Even so, he has not sold independent items, such as a pruned sycamore tree and a sturdy watchman's hut.

Art: Bountiful Harvest by Camille Pissarro

Bava Batra 68 – One Sells a Town (Civil)

One who sells a town without specifying what is included in the sale has sold the houses, pits, ditches, vaults, bathhouses, dovecotes, and olive presses. Still, he has not sold the movable property in town, such as household implements and food, because he plans to take these with him.

However, if he said, "I am selling you the town and all that is contained therein," then even if there were animals and slaves in the town at the time of the sale, they are sold along with the town.

Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says, "He has sold even the santer." What a santer is is a matter of dispute: either a town clerk, a slave owned by the city who kept information on boundaries and ownership of properties, or the fields that immediately surround the city.

Art: Figures in a Dutch Street by Willem Koekkeok

Bava Batra 67 – One Sells an Olive Press (Civil)

The building of an olive press was generally made solely for that purpose. Hence, the sale of this building includes all non-movable items used in the pressing process.

One who sells the house of an olive press without specifying what is included in the sale has sold the vat, the crusher (used to pre-soften olives), and the "maidens." These items are automatically sold with the press because they are attached to the building where the press is housed.

However, he has not sold the boards, the wheel, or the beam. These items are excluded from sale because they are not attached to the building.

If he said, "I am selling you the house of the olive press and all that is contained therein," he has sold all of these items - but not unrelated items that are merely stored in the house.

Art: The Production of Oil by Philip Galle, engraving

Bava Batra 66 – A Mortar that was Carved then Attached to the Ground (Civil)

One who sells a house has sold the mortar – if that mortar was carved in a stone that formed part of the house's wall. However, if the mortar was made from an unattached piece of wood or stone and then attached to the ground, such mortar is not included in the sale.

Rabbi Eliezer says, "Anything attached to the ground is considered the ground. Therefore, he has sold the mortar."

What would the Sages say regarding food placed on this mortar if the mortar is ritually impure? Is it part of the house and thus part of the ground for ritual laws, even if not for commerce, and then the food is pure, or is the mortar not part of the ground for both selling and ritual, and the food is impure? - This remains unresolved.

Art: Utensils of Baba Yago From Russian Fairy Tales

Bava Batra 65 – The Bigger the Property Sold, the More is Included with it (Civil)

In the discussion about the seller's attitude being generous or stingy, the law follows Rabbi Nachman, who said that the seller sells generously. Rav Nachman was close to the Exilarch, the Jewish ruler of Babylonia, and observed many judges and court cases, so he knew which view was followed in practice.

One who sold a house without specifying what was included in the sale has sold the attached mortar, not the movable mortar, nor the movable oven or stove. If the seller said, "I am selling the house and all contained therein," all movable objects are sold – but not the easily movable objects (carried away). Even easily movable objects are sold if one sells a courtyard with everything therein. If one sells a town, even his animals therein are included.

Art: The Marketplace, Vitebsk by Marc Chagall

Bava Batra 64 – Does the Seller Sell with a Generous or a Stingy Attitude? (Civil)

If one sold a house to his fellow, neither the house's pit nor its cistern (dug into the ground and used as water reservoirs) is included in the sale, even if the seller wrote in the deed, "I am selling the depth and height of the house."

However, to get to the cistern, the seller has to purchase the right-of-way from the buyer, in the opinion of Rabbi Akiva. According to him, the typical inclination of one who sells something is to transfer it fully and generously without reserving anything for himself. In this case, he also transferred the right of way by not saying anything. The Sages disagree and say that typically, the seller wants to sell no more than he has to, retaining the right to pass through the house to reach the cistern.

Art: Woman Drawing Water from a Copper Cistern by Jean Baptiste Simeon Chardin

Bava Batra 63 – No Unnecessary Terms in Legal Documents (Civil)

If an ineffectual clause appears in a legal document, it is reinterpreted in such a way that it is effectual.

For example, if one sells a house to his fellow and says to him, "I am selling you this house with the stipulation that the fenced rooftop is mine" - the fenced rooftop is his. The clause "rooftop is mine" is redundant. It is already his, as we have learned before. Therefore, this clause is reinterpreted to give him additional rights.

Exactly which rights he gets is subject to a dispute: he may project beams from the roof into the adjacent yard, or he may rebuild it if it collapses, with the second view prevailing.

Art: View over Roman Rooftops by Constantin Hansen

Bava Batra 62 – "I am not retaining anything" in Real Estate Contracts (Civil)

Suppose one sells a "house" in a large apartment building to his fellow. Even though he defined the boundaries of the entire building in the deed, it is possible that he intended to sell just one apartment, and he drew the boundaries of the whole building only to utilize known landmarks. Since the seller stated that he was selling a "house" (as opposed to an "apartment building"), the boundaries written in a deed are regarded as imprecise, and the buyer acquires only one apartment.

Therefore, it is recommended that the seller write some clause such as "I am not retaining anything for myself in this transaction," because with it, the seller relinquishes his possible claim that the boundaries he drew were imprecise.

Art: Albrecht Durer on the Balcony of his House by William Bell Scott

Bava Batra 61 – When One Sells a House (Civil)

The following rulings were promulgated for those times' architectural styles, usages, and practices. All such regulations depend on the prevailing custom at any given time or place.

If one sells a house without specifying what is included in the sale, he has not sold the annex, even if it opens into the house. Nor has he sold a storeroom in the rear of the house. Such closets served as a storage area for valuables and did not function as part of the living area of the house. Neither has he sold the rooftop if it has a parapet around it at least ten handbreads high.

Art: A lady in a garden by moonlight - by Atkinson Grimshaw

Bava Batra 60 – Source for Laws of Privacy (Civil)

Even if one is allowed by others to open a window or a door in a courtyard, he should not open a window opposite another's window nor a door opposite another's door.  Why?

"and Bilam raised his eye and saw Israel dwelling tribe by tribe...and he said...how goodly are your tents!" Bilam saw that the openings of their tents were not aligned one opposite the other, and his words demonstrate how highly Torah values privacy.

When the Temple was destroyed, many Jews became ascetics and resolved not to eat meat and not to drink wine. Rabbi Yehoshua asked them why. They said it because the Temple does not have it anymore. He replied, then, you should not eat bread, fruit, or drink water because these too were parts of the Temple service. Rather, in a house, leave a small part unpainted, and in a feast, skip a dish.

Art: Still Life With a Piece of Beef by Claude Monet

Bava Batra 59 – Privacy Rights Limit Renovations (Civil)

One may not open his windows into a jointly owned courtyard, since he will be able to observe the activities of his partners in the courtyard below without their knowledge, thereby committing visual trespass.

The person opening the window could argue to his partner: "In any event you need to conceal your actions in the courtyard from me, and windows will not result in any additional visual trespass."

However, his partner can reply, "When you were in your house and your door was closed, I was able to use the courtyard for private activities. But now, if you open a window to the courtyard, even when you are in your home, I need to conceal myself from you."

Art: Room in New York by Edward Hopper

Bava Batra 58 – Rav Banaah and the Crypt of Abraham (Civil)

Rav Banaah would mark the boundaries of burial crypts by measuring them inside, so that people would not inadvertently walk over them and contract ritual impurity.

When he reached the crypt of Abraham, he found Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, one of the seven righteous people who never died. Rav Banaah asked, What is Abraham doing?" and Eliezer replied, "He is lying in the arms of Sarah, and she is peering at his head." This symbolizes the true union of Abraham and Sarah, which transcended the physical limitations of their earthly marriage.

Eliezer announced Rav Banaah, and Abraham said, "Let him enter. It is well known that there is no physical desire in this world." Rav Banaah surveyed the dimensions and departed.

Art: Couple in the Street by Charles Angrand

Bava Batra 57 - Activities that Establish Presumption of Ownership (Civil)

These activities do not establish chazakah: if a person would place an animal in a courtyard belonging to someone else; if he would place an oven, millstones, or a stove in the courtyard; if he would raise a chicken or deposit his manure there. The property owner can claim that he saw no harm in allowing these items to remain.

But if the user made a partition for his animals ten hand-breadths high, or he erected such a partition for an oven, stove or millstone; if he brought his chicken into the owner's house, or if he made for his manure in the courtyard a place either three hand-breadths deep or three hand-breadths high – this is a chazakah. If the owner did not protest these uses of his property for three years, it supports the user's claim that he acquired the right to use the purposes for those purposes.

Art: Feeding the Chickens by Alexandre Defaux

Bava Batra 56 – False Witnesses for Chazakah (Civil)

If two witnesses testified on behalf of a person that he used a property for three years, and they were found to be false witnesses, they pay the original owner everything.

Ordinarily, when two pairs of witnesses offer conflicting testimony, the result is a stalemate; the court does not know which pair to believe. However, when the second pair impugns the first pair's ability to have witnessed the event altogether, the second pair is believed, and the first witnesses are designated false (plotters). Whatever penalty they sought to impose against their victim is assessed against them.

In our case, they sought to deprive the original owner of the field by falsely testifying that the occupant had established a chazakah. Accordingly, they must pay the field's value to the owner, who receives these punitive damages in addition to the field itself, which he retrieves from the occupant.

Art: Workers Talking Politics by Hermann Kauffmann

Bava Batra 55 – The Legal Force of Secular Law (Civil)

The law of the kingdom is the law

All tax and civil laws that prevail in a country have legal force in Jewish court, since the country's citizenry voluntarily accepts upon itself to abide by the government's laws. Thus, a Jew who takes possession of property according to the provisions of local law is not guilty of theft even if the Torah law would consider the property belonging to another Jew. This applies, however, only to the laws sanctioned by the constitution of the country but not when monarchy appropriates property by force.

The chazakah of the Persians is not effective until forty years have elapsed

Although in Persia only recorded real estate transactions were recognized as valid, anyone who occupied a property for forty years was considered to be its legitimate owner.

Art: A Persian in Thought by Kirk

Bava Batra 54 – Acquiring Land by Lying Down on It (Civil)

Said Rav Amram, "The following ruling was told to us by Rav Sheshet, and he enlightened our eyes by adducing proof of it."

The rule

A convert is like a new-born child: he has severed connection with his old family, and if he has not created a new one yet, he has no inheritors. One who spreads out mats on the ownerless land of a deceased convert and lies down upon them has acquired the land.

Proof

One can acquire a Canaanite slave using a propriety act, such as having the slave put on a shoe for him, remove his shoe, or lift him. We see that supporting the weight is a propriety act – and so it is with the land: spreading the mats and lying down on it constitutes a proprietary act. Compare this to a slave woman.

Art: Offering Baby a Rose by James Goodwin Clonney

Bava Batra 53 – Is the Presence of the Giver Required? (Civil)

After a price has been agreed upon, some indication of the seller's readiness to transfer the property is necessary. This can be accomplished by the seller instructing the buyer to go and perform an act of chazakah upon the land. But where the seller is present, he does not have to say anything, and his silence alone indicates his acquiescence.

What is the rule for a gift?

Rav says that the giver gives the gift generously out of fondness for the recipient, so no further instruction is necessary, and the chazakah can be performed in his absence. Shmuel says that since the giver receives no money, his instruction is undoubtedly required. Actually, Shmuel agrees that the gift is given generously. However, no gift is possibly being given at all.

Art: Giving Presents At A Wedding by Pieter the Elder Bruegel

Bava Batra 52 – Two Meanings of Chazakah (Civil)

The chazakah, or presumption of ownership, discussed so far had a challenge against it. For example, a case where a seller, that is, the previous owner, claims "I did not sell the land," and the purchaser, that is, the occupant, claims, "purchased it" - this is the chazakah of proving title, which requires three years to take effect.

But regarding a chazakah against which there is no challenge, for example, one who gives a gift, or two brothers who divide an estate – where the purpose of chazakah is merely to acquire the property in question – if one locked, fenced, or breached the property even to a minor extent – this is considered chazakah.

Art: Children On A Fence by Winslow Homer

Bava Batra 51 – When One Sells Land to his Wife (Civil)

If a man sold land to his wife, and she bought it with money that he knew nothing about till now, he can claim that he only wanted to discover the source of her hidden funds, but not to really sell the field, and thus reverse the sale. However, the sale is final if she buys it with money he had known from before.

The best way to sell the field to one's wife is to write both terms in the contract, "the field is sold to you" and "the field is given to you." The sale term will help her if the field is repossessed by the husband's lenders – by giving her the right to be reimbursed by the husband. The term "given" will help against a neighbor's right to buy an adjoining field.

Art: The Moneylender And His Wife (detail) by Quentin Massys

Bava Batra 50 – No Chazakah for Damages (Civil)

One cannot establish a chazakah on the property of a married woman. If someone occupies her property for three years without her protest, she can say that she expected her husband to protest, so her absence of protest is of no consequence. She does not have to protest her husband's use of her land either. However, if her husband ruins her field with ditches, she has to protest; otherwise, her absence of protest will be interpreted as an admission that he had bought the land.

As a rule, however, one can't establish the right to damaging behavior. For example, if one installs a kiln that emits heavy smoke, he cannot claim to have established a chazakah. The neighbor can protest and block this after any time period. The same applies to an outhouse if its odor disturbs the neighbor.

Art: Woman With A Dove by Cecco del Caravaggio

Bava Batra 49 – Witnesses Can't Change their Minds (Civil)

Tabbi distressed Pappi until he relented and sold him what he demanded. Rabbah bar bar Chanah signed two documents: a notification that the sale was executed under duress, as well as the document of purchase.

Said Rav Huna: both documents have legal force. But how can it be? Instead, Rav Huna meant that the forced sale would be valid if not canceled by the prior notification – since it was Rav Huna who introduced the forced sale rule.

But we have a rule that a witness, having testified, can't offer a new testimony contradicting his first one. How could Rabbah sign on both documents? - Exactly! Since he signed on the notification of duress first, his signature on the sale document becomes invalid.

Art: Queen Elizabeth Sign The Condemnation To Death To Maria Stuart by Sandon Liezen Mayer

Bava Batra 48 – Is a Forced Action Valid? (Civil)

If they subjected him to distress until he finally relented and sold them what they demanded, his sale is valid, and he cannot retract.

What is the reason?

* Is it because any sale is forced since the seller needs money? - No, it could be different when it is against his will.
* Is it because a recalcitrant husband forced to give a Get is indeed divorced? - This is not valid proof because it is a mitzvah to heed the directive of the Sages.

Rather, it is derived from the following ruling: if they subjected a woman to distress until she agreed to be married, the marriage is valid. This proof stands. However, the Sages later annulled such a marriage: he behaved improperly; therefore, they behaved improperly with him.

Art: The Argument by William Henry Knight

Bava Batra 47 – Interested Party in a Lawsuit (Civil)

A person is disqualified from testifying in a matter in which he has a material interest. Can a sharecropper testify on behalf of his employer concerning the land on which he is working?

If there is unharvested fruit in the field, he cannot testify. The sharecropper has a material interest because if someone else proves to be the actual owner of the field, the sharecropper will not collect his full share of the unharvested fruit.

However, he can testify if there is no fruit in the field. Though advancing his employer's cause might protect his job as a sharecropper in this field, he knows that many other sharecropping jobs are available to him. Moreover, he knows that his employer is not obligated to continue to employ him. Therefore, his interest in the outcome of the case is negligible.

Art: In The Orchard Haylands Graffham by Henry Herbert La Thangue

Bava Batra 46 – Discovery Request Against a Craftsman (Civil)

Abaye said to Rava: "Come, and I will show you the practice of the cheats of Pumbedita" (these cheats were craftsmen).

If someone says to one of them, "Give me back my cloak, which I gave you to repair," he answers, "It never happened." And if the claimant persists, "But I have witnesses who saw it in your possession!" - he retorts, "That cloak which they saw was a different one."

And if the claimant says, "Produce the cloak to ascertain if it is, in fact, mine," - the craftsman says to him, "I will not produce the cloak because of your unfounded claims, as it would be unfair to the owner."

Art: A Wife Hiding Her Infidelity From Her Husband Under A Blue Cloak (A Flemish Proverb) by Peter The Younger Brueghel

Bava Batra 45 – The Chazakah of a Craftsman (Civil)

A craftsman does not establish a chazakah in an article known to have belonged to someone simply by having it in his possession.

Said Rabbah, "This is only true when the original owner gave the craftsman the article in the presence of witnesses. But if not, the craftsman could have denied receiving the article altogether and is believed on the strength of the "Why would he lie?" argument.

Said Abaye, "If so, he should be believed even if there were witnesses, for had he wanted to lie, he could have said that he returned the article."

They differ about the following question: if someone deposits an article with his fellow in the presence of witnesses, does the custodian need to return it also in the presence of witnesses? The accepted answer is "no," meaning Abaye's ruling prevails.

Art: Treasure Chest by Johann Georg Hinz

Bava Batra 44 – The Seller of a Field Cannot Testify for the Buyer (Civil)

If one borrows money, his real property becomes a guarantee for his repayment of the loan, but not his movables. Even if he promises to repay with "the shirt on his back," still, if he does not have that shirt, he can't repay with it. However, even if he sold the field in the interim, physically, the field is still there, and the lender can repossess it.

Because of that, the seller of a field cannot testify on behalf of the buyer. If someone can prove that the seller never owned the field and he is, in fact, a thief, then that field is not a guarantee for the seller's loans, and the seller becomes a "bad person who borrows and does not repay" - a situation that people try to avoid.

Art: Self-portrait with a white shirt by Jose Benlliure Ortiz

Bava Batra 43 – Partners CAN Establish Chazakah (Civil)

Shmuel said the following three rulings: partners can establish chazakah against each other, testify on behalf of the other, and become paid custodians one for the other.

How can Shmuel contradict the accepted rule that partners cannot establish chazakah? – His version of this ruling was that they can. Shmuel explains that it is normal for partners to expect regular returns from their field. If one occupied it for three consecutive years, he is believed to say that he bought his partner out, for otherwise, they would alternate more frequently.

How can he testify for his partner if he is interested in the outcome? He needs to renounce his share.

How are they paid custodians liable for theft? If they guard the field in turns, then each pays the other with his work.

Art: In the Wheat Field by Wlodzimierz Tetmajer

Bava Batra 42 – Rules of Chazakah (Civil)

Suppose three people owned a field in succession, each one for a year. In that case, they combine to establish a chazakah against the original owner, provided their purchases were recorded in deeds. The original owner can't claim that the quick succession of owners was proof of their illegitimate occupancy without him needing to protest. Instead, the public knowledge of their sales should have caused his protest.

Some people have legitimate access to other people's property, so they can never establish chazakah, even if they have the movables in their possession or if they occupy the real property. Thus, craftsmen, sharecroppers, and property administrators cannot establish a chazakah. Similarly, a husband cannot establish a chazakah on his wife's property, nor can a wife establish a chazakah on her husband's property, a father on his son's property, or a son on his father's property.

Art: Aline Charigot and Renoir by August Renoir

Bava Batra 41 – Presumption of Ownership Must Be Accompanied by a Claim (Civil)

Any chazakah not accompanied by a claim is not a meaningful chazakah and does not entitle the occupant to keep the property. How so?

If the previous owner said to the occupant, "What are you doing on my property?" - and the occupant replied, "I am here because nobody ever said anything to me," - his chazakah is not meaningful, and he must vacate the property.

If, however, the occupant replied, "You sold this land to me," "You gave it to me as a gift," "Your father sold it to me," or "Your father gave it to me as a gift," - it is a meaningful chazakah, and the occupant keeps the property. One who comes into a property by inheritance does not require a supporting claim.

Art: A Notty Question by Louis Charles Miller