משנה: הַמּוֹכֵר אֶת הַשָּׂדֶה מָכַר אֶת הָאֲבָנִים שֶׁהֵן לְצָרְכָּהּ וְאֶת הַקָּנִים שֶׁבַּכֶּרֶם שֶׁהֵם לְצָרְכּוֹ וְאֶת הַתְּבוּאָה שֶׁהִיא מְחוּבֶּרֶת לַקַּרְקַע וְאֶת מְחִיצַת הַקָּנִים שֶׁהִיא פְחוּתָה מִבֵּית רוֹבַע וְאֶת הַשּׁוֹמֵירָה שֶׁאֵינָהּ עֲשׂוּיָה בַטִּיט וְאֶת הֶחָרוּב שֶׁאֵינוֹ מוּרְכָּב וְאֶת בְּתוּלַת הַשִּׁיקְמָה. אֲבָל לֹא מָכַר לֹא אֶת הָאֲבָנִים שֶׁאֶינָן לְצָרְכָּהּ וְאֶת הַקָּנִים שֶׁבַּכֶּרֶם שֶׁאֵינָן לְצָרְכּוֹ וְאֶת הַתְּבוּאָה שֶׁהִיא תְלוּשָׁה מִן הַקַּרְקַע. בִּזְמַן שֶׁאָמַר לוֹ הוּא וְכָל־מַה שֶׁבְּתוֹכָהּ הֲרֵי כולָּן מְכוּרִין. בֵּין כָּךְ וּבֵין כָּךְ לֹא מָכַר לֹא אֶת מְחִיצַת הַקָּנִים שֶׁהִיא בֵית רוֹבַע וְאֶת הַשּׁוֹמֵירָה שֶׁהִיא עֲשׂוּיָה בַטִּיט וְאֶת הֶחָרוּב הַמּוּרְכָּב וְאֶת סַדָּן הַשִּׁיקְמָה. לֹא אֶת הַבּוֹר וְלֹא אֶת הַגַּת וְלֹא אֶת הַשּׁוֹבָךְ בֵּין חֲרֵיבִין בֵּין שְׁלֵימִין. וְצָרִיךְ לִיקַּח לוֹ דֶּרֶךְ דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לִיקַּח לוֹ דֶּרֶךְ. וּמוֹדֶה רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה בִּזְמַן שֶׁאָמַר לוֹ חוּץ מֵאֵילּוּ אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לִיקַּח לוֹ דֶּרֶךְ. מְכָרָן לְאַחֵר רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אוֹמֵר אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לִיקַּח לוֹ דֶּרֶךְ וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים צָרִיךְ לִיקַּח לוֹ דֶּרֶךְ. בַּמֶּה דְבָרִים אֲמוּרִים בְּמוֹכֵר אֲבָל בְּנוֹתֵן מַתָּנָה נוֹתֵן אֶת כּוּלָּן. הָאַחִים שֶׁחָֽלְקוּ זָכוּ בַשָּׂדֶה זָכָה בְכוּלָּן. הַמַּחֲזִיק בְּנִיכְסֵי הַגֵּר הֶחֱזִיק בַּשָּׂדֶה הֶחֱזִיק בְּכוּלָּן. הַמַּקְדִּישׁ אֶת הַשָּׂדֶה הִקְדִּישׁ אֶת כּוּלָּן. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר הַמַּקְדִּישׁ אֶת הַשָּׂדֶה לֹא הִקְדִּישׁ אֶלָּא הֶחָרוּב הַמּוּרְכָּב וְאֶת סַדָּן הַשִּׁיקְמָה. MISHNAH: He who sells a field sold the stones which are needed for it⁶²For fencing., and the posts in a vineyard which are needed for it⁶³To support the vines., and grain standing on the ground, and a reed fence taking up less than a bet rova‘, and a watchman’s hut not made with mortar, and a carob tree not yet grafted, and a virgin sycamore tree⁶⁴The last two are young trees whose roots have not yet spread; therefore they are not included if their place was not sold. But an older carob tree grafted for better yield and a sycamore already cut once and now held for the production of logs (an “anvil sycamore”) have large systems of roots spreading wide; they become part of the field..
But he sold neither the stones which are not needed for it, nor the posts in a vineyard which are not needed for it, nor grain harvested from the ground. But if he said to him, “it and all it contains,” all is sold. In no case did he sell either a reed fence taking up more than a bet rova‘⁶⁵114+ square cubits; the reeds themselves become a cash crop., or a watchman’s hut made with mortar⁶⁶Which is valuable as dwelling by itself., or a grafted carob tree, or an anvil sycamore tree⁶⁴The last two are young trees whose roots have not yet spread; therefore they are not included if their place was not sold. But an older carob tree grafted for better yield and a sycamore already cut once and now held for the production of logs (an “anvil sycamore”) have large systems of roots spreading wide; they become part of the field..
Neither the cistern, nor the wine press, nor a dovecote⁶⁷All of these are not intrinsically connected with a field. whether deserted or intact; and he has to buy himself access¹²If the seller wants to use cistern or cellar, he has to buy access from the buyer, the new owner of the surrounding area., the words of Rebbi Aqiba; but the Sages say that he does not not have to buy himself access¹³They hold that nobody wants to make a contract which will hurt himself.. Rebbi Aqiba agrees that if he said “except these”¹⁴If cistern and/or cellar are mentioned as excluded in the sales contract., he does not not have to buy himself access. If he sold them¹⁵A person sold cistern or cellar to a third party while retaining ownership of his house and courtyard. This part of the Mishnah is quoted in Ketubot 13:7:3" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Ketubot.13.7.3">Ketubot 13:7, Notes 112–115. to another person, Rebbi Aqiba said, he does not have to buy access¹⁶In this situation, he adopts the reasoning of the Sages in the preceding case., but the Sages say, he does have to buy access¹⁷They hold that (particularly in an inflationary environment) a person may buy real estate purely as an investment without intention of using it personally. Therefore, nothing is sold which is not spelled out in the contract..
When has this been said? For the seller. But one who gives a gift, gives everything⁶⁸A gift is supposed to be given in a magnanimous spirit.. Brothers who divided [an inheritance]: if one acquired a field he acquired everything⁶⁹Family relations are helped by clean divisions of property.. Somebody taking possession of a proselyte’s property: if he took possession of a field, he took possession of everything⁷⁰Since the proselyte died without relatives who could have inherited from him, the person who takes possession of his estate has no competitors with whom to share.. If somebody dedicated a field to the Temple, he dedicated everything; Rebbi Simeon says that he who dedicated a field to the Temple only dedicated a grafted carob tree and an anvil sycamore tree^64,The last two are young trees whose roots have not yet spread; therefore they are not included if their place was not sold. But an older carob tree grafted for better yield and a sycamore already cut once and now held for the production of logs (an “anvil sycamore”) have large systems of roots spreading wide; they become part of the field.⁷¹But nothing not included in the definition of “a field”..

הלכה: הַמּוֹכֵר אֶת הַשָּׂדֶה כול׳. אֲבָל לֹא מָכַר כול׳. לֹא אֶת הַבּוֹר כול׳. הַמַּקְדִּישׁ אֶת הַשָּׂדֶה כול׳. דְּבֵית רִבִּי יַנַּאי אָֽמְרִין. בִּמְחַלְּקִין לִגְפָנִים. רִבִּי חִייָה רוֹבָה שָׁאַל. הָיוּ שָׁם חֻלְיוֹת מְחוּלָּקוֹת לִבְרוֹת. רִבִּי יִצְחָק בַּר טֶבְלַיי שָׁאַל. הָיוּ שָׁם טַבְלִיּוֹת שֶׁל שַׁיִישׁ מְחוּלָקוֹת לִכְתָלִין. רִבִּי יוּדָן בְּרִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל שָׁאַל. הָיוּ שָׁם מַלְבֵּנִין מְחוּלָקוֹת לְחַלּוֹנוֹת. HALAKHAH: 8: “He who sells a field,” etc. Halakhah 9: “But he sold neither,” etc. Bava Batra 4:8:2-4" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Bava_Batra.4.8.2-4">Halakhah 10: “Neither the cistern,” etc. Halakhah 11: “If somebody dedicated a field to the Temple,” etc. In the House of Rebbi Yannai they said, poles for vines⁷²This explains what is meant by “posts in a vineyard” in Bava Batra 4:8:1" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Bava_Batra.4.8.1">Mishnah 8; the same explanation is given in the Babli, 69a, where Rashbam explains that these poles in French are called palis.. The Elder Rebbi Ḥiyya asked, if there were split rings to select?⁷³This sentence is unintelligible. The thrust of the other two questions is very clear. If walls were covered with marble plates or windows framed with wood frames, the covering and the frames would be sold with the house. But what is the status of material prepared for installation which was not yet installed at the time of the sale? R. Ḥiyya seems to ask a similar question relative to agricultural property. חוּליה means “ring”, from the root חלל, חול “to describe a circle”, but it is not clear that חליה is the same as חוליה.The translation in the text follows R. Eliahu Fulda, not to leave the sentence untranslated. He reads חליות מחולקות as “half circles” formed by pliable twigs, such as willow branches, with both ends planted on the ground to support branches of fruit trees heavy with fruit. He also derives the hapax ברות from ברר “to select”. [Starting with the Constantinople edition (1622), all printed editions read לכרות “to cut off”, which replaces an unknown word by one well-known but devoid of sense in the context.] But one could as well read ברות as Arabic بُرَاة “hunter’s hut” and refer the question to the watchman’s hut and ask about the status of such a hut built with split rings formed of any material. One also could read חַלִּיּוֹת מְחוּלָּקוֹת לְבָרוֹת “chopped herbs (خَلٌى) for healing”, whether these have the status of cut grain. Moïse Schwab translates: “S’il y a des morceaux de joncs divisées pour séparer les vignes, sont-ils tous considérés comme nécessaires”; it is difficult to read this into the text. Rebbi Isaac bar Tebelai asked, if there were marble plates⁷⁴Greek τάβλα, Latin tabula. for walls⁷⁵In the Babli, 69a, a similar question is asked about stones prepared to be used to make a fence around an agricultural property but not yet displayed; it is determined that their status in a sale depends on a difference of opinion between R. Meїr and the anonymous majority.? Rebbi Yudan ben Rebbi Ismael asked: If there were split rods to frame windows⁷⁶In the Babli, 69a, the question is asked by R. Ze‘ira about finished wood frames for windows (slits in the wall without glass) which are not structural but purely ornamental; the question is not answered.?

רִבִּי חִייָה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. יֵשׁ שָׁם עֲרוּגָה שֶׁהִיא שִׁשָׁה עַל שִׁישָׁה וְיֵשׁ לָהּ שֵׁם בִּפְנֵי עַצְמָהּ אֵינָהּ מְכוּרָה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. הַקּוֹנֶה סַדַּן שִׁקְמָה בְּתוֹךְ שֶׁלַּחֲבֵירוֹ מַחֲולֹקֶת רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בֵּרִבִּי יוֹסֵי וְרַבָּנִין. רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בֵּירִבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר. קָנָה קַרְקַע. וְרַבָּנִין אָֽמְרִין. לֹא קָנָה. רִבִּי חִייָה בַּר װָא שָׁאַל. מָכַר לוֹ כָּל־הָאִילָן וְשִׁייֵר לוֹ סַדַּן שִׁקְמָה. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בֵּירִבִּי יוֹסֵי. קָנָה קַרְקַע. עַל דַּעְתִּין דְּרַבָּנִין. לֹא קָנָה קַרְקַע. רִבִּי יִצְחָק בַּר טֶבְלַיי שָׁאַל. מָכַר לוֹ כָּל־הָאִילָן וְזַיִת שֶׁבְּמָקוֹם פְּלוֹנִי כָּל זֵיתִים שֶׁיֵּשׁ שָׁם מְכוּרִין. רִבִּי יוּדָן בֵּירִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל שָׁאַל. הַקּוֹנֶה ג̇ כִיתֵּי קָנִים קָנָה אֶרֶז גָּדוֹל שֶׁבְּאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל. Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: A vegetable bed which is six by six [handbreadths]⁷⁶In the Babli, 69a, the question is asked by R. Ze‘ira about finished wood frames for windows (slits in the wall without glass) which are not structural but purely ornamental; the question is not answered. and has its own name⁷⁷For example, the name of the spice which usually is grown there such as “the bed of fenugreek”. is not sold⁷⁸Unless it is specifically mentioned in a sales contract of agricultural property.. Rebbi Joḥanan said: There is disagreement between Rebbi Ismael ben Rebbi Yose and the rabbis about one who bought an anvil sycamore⁶⁴The last two are young trees whose roots have not yet spread; therefore they are not included if their place was not sold. But an older carob tree grafted for better yield and a sycamore already cut once and now held for the production of logs (an “anvil sycamore”) have large systems of roots spreading wide; they become part of the field. on another’s property. Rebbi Ismael ben Rebbi Yose says, he acquired the land. The rabbis say, he did not acquire⁷⁹As mentioned in Bava Batra 4:8:3" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Bava_Batra.4.8.3">Note 64, the anvil sycamore spreads its root widely. If the roots of the tree were restricted to the earth on which it stands, it could not live.
In practical terms, if the owner of the tree is the owner of the land, he may plant a new tree on its spot if the original tree dies; if he is not the owner of the land, he cannot plant a replacement. In view of Bava Batra 5:2:1" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Bava_Batra.5.2.1">Mishnah 5:5, there really should be no problem about a single tree.. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba asked: If somebody sold all trees but reserved for himself an anvil sycamore. In the opinion of Rebbi Ismael ben Rebbi Yose, he acquired the land⁸⁰He did not acquire it but never gave up his ownership.. In the opinion of the rabbis, he did not acquire the land⁸¹He gave up ownership.. Rebbi Isaac bar Tebelai asked: If somebody sold all trees and an olive tree at place X, are all olive trees at that place sold⁸²If an unspecified tree was sold and the seller had more than one tree at place X, the buyer might lay claim to any one of them. The treatment of the case is in dispute between R. Meïr and R. Yose, cf. Kiddushin 3:8:2-10:2" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Kiddushin.3.8.2-10.2">Qiddušin 3:10.? Rebbi Yudan ben Rebbi Ismael asked: If somebody bought three groups of reeds, did he buy the greatest cedar in the Land of Israel⁸³If he bought reeds that cover more than a bet rova‘, did he acquire only the reeds or everything that grows among them??

בַּמֶּה דְבָרִים אֲמוּרִים. בְּמוֹכֵר. אֲבָל לֹא בְנוֹתֵן מַתָּנָה נוֹתֵן אֶת כּוּלָּם. מַה בֵין מוֹכֵר וּמַה בֵין נוֹתֵן מַתָּנָה. רִבִּי בָּא בַּר טֶבְלַיי בְשֵׁם רַב. שֶׁכֵּן דֶּרֶךְ הַנּוֹתֵן מַתָּנָה לִהְיוֹת נוֹתֵן בְּעַיִן יָפָה. רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹנָתָן. שֶׁכֵּן דֶּרֶךְ הַלְּקוּחוֹת לִהְיוֹת מְדַקְדְּקִין. וּמַה בֵינֵיהוֹן. הֶקְדֵּשׁ. מָאן דָּמַר. שֶׁכֵּן דֶּרֶךְ הַנּוֹתֵן מַתָּנָה לִהְיוֹת נוֹתֵן בְּעַיִן יָפָה. אַף הַמַּקְדִּישׁ בְּעַיַן יָפָה מַקְדִּישׁ. וּמָאן דָּמַר. שֶׁכֵּן דֶּרֶךְ הַלְּקוּחוֹת לִהְיוֹת מְדַקְדְּקִין. מַה אָמַר בְּמַקְדִּישׁ. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מֵהָדָא. הָאַחִין שֶׁחָֽלְקוּ יֵשׁ לָהֶן דֶּרֶךְ זֶה עַל גַּבֵּי זֶה. וְאִית דְּבָעֵי מֵימַר. כֵּן אָמַר רִבִּי לִעֶזֶר. הָאַחִין שֶׁחָֽלְקוּ זָכוּ בַשָּׂדֶה זָכוּ בְכוּלָּן. הַמַּחֲזִיק בְּנִיכְסֵי הַגֵּר קָנָה. הֶחֱזִיק בַּשָּׂדֶה הֶחֱזִיק בְּכוּלָּן. הִקְדִּישׁ אֶת הַשָּׂדֶה הִקְדִּישׁ אֶת כּוּלָּן. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר. הַמַּקְדִּישׁ אֶת הַשָּׂדֶה לֹא הִקְדִּישׁ הֶחָרוּב הַמּוּרְכָּב וְשִׁיקְמָה הַיְשָׁנָה. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁיּוֹנְקִין מִשֶּׁל הֶקְדֵּשׁ. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁשִּׁייֵר לוֹ דֶּרֶךְ. אִם לֹא שִׁייֵר לוֹ דֶּרֶךְ אַף הֵן אֵין יוֹנְקִין מִשֶּׁל הֶקְדֵּשׁ. “When has this been said? For the seller. But one who gives a gift gives everything.” What is the difference between a seller and the giver of a gift? Rebbi Abba bar Ṭebelai in the name of Rav: Because the giver of a gift usually is magnanimous⁸⁴In the Babli, 71a, this is the conclusion reached after discussion.. Rebbi Samuel ben Rav Naḥman in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Because buyers care about minutiae⁸⁵Since the buyer gives the money, he can be specific and insist to spell out in the contract what he wants, but the recipient of a gift has to accept what he is given. Therefore, a sales contract has to be interpreted exactly but in the case of a gift it is up to the court to guess the donor’s intention.. What is the difference between these opinions? A dedication to the Temple. He who says, because the giver of a gift usually is magnanimous, also the person vowing to the Temple usually is magnanimous. But he who says, because buyers care about minutiae, what does he say about a dedication to the Temple? Let us hear from the following⁸⁶E here has an additional text: נִיִשְׁמְעִינָהּ מֵהָדָא. הָאַחִין שֶׁחָֽלְקוּ זָכוּ בַשָּׂדֶה זָכוּ בְכוּלָּן. רִבִּי לָֽעְזָר שְׁאִיל. עַל כָּל־הַפֶּרֶק הוּשְּׁבָה אוֹ עַל הָרִאשׁוֹנָה הוּשְּׁבָה. “Let us hear from the following: ‘Brothers who divided [an inheritance], if they acquired a field they acquired everything.’ Rebbi Eleazar asked: Does this refer to the entire Chapter or only to the first mention?”: “Brothers who divided [an inheritance], if one acquired a field he acquired everything. Somebody taking possession of the property of a convert aquired it; if he took possession of a field, he took possession of everything. If somebody dedicated a field to the Temple, he dedicated everything. Rebbi Simeon says that he who dedicated a field to the Temple, only dedicated a grafted carob tree and an old sycamore tree.” Because they nurse from Temple property⁸⁷Babli 72b. He holds that a gift to the Temple has to be interpreted narrowly, like a sale. The exeption are trees with widespread roots which must be included, even against the giver’s wish, because of the severity of the sin of larceny from Temple property which would be committed if the donor profited from growth of the tree by the nutrients which its roots absorb from Temple property.. Because he reserved access to himself? If he had not reserved access for himself, would they not feed from Temple property⁸⁸The brother whose inheritance is accessible only through another brother’s property has the right of passage automatically, without specifically insisting on it at the time of the distribution, just as the anvil sycamore is part of Temple property even if the donor to the Temple does not specify it. Since the majority disagree with R. Simeon, they must hold that the donor to the Temple also is magnanimous.?