Bava Batra

And R. Dimi b. Joseph said in the name of R. Eleazar: Movables  in the case of a slave were regarded  as a reservation; but movables in the case of a kethubah  were not regarded as a reservation!  — There,  [R. Joseph retorted,] it would have been proper that [the term] 'land', should not have been used [at all]; only because in the first part [of the Mishnah] it was stated, 'R. Akiba said: Land of any size is liable to [have the ears at its] corner[s left for the poor], and to [the bringing of its] first ripe fruit [to Jerusalem]; a prosbul  may be written in connection with it;  and movable property  may be acquired in conjunction with it by means of money, deed  and possession',  [the term] 'land' was in consequence used [in the second part of this Mishnah also]. And [do you suggest. Abaye again asked R. Joseph,  that] wherever 'whatsoever'  was taught no [minimum] size is required?  Surely we learnt: R. Dosa b. Horkinas said: Five ewes which supply  [fleeces of the weight of] a maneh and a half each,  are subject to [the law of] 'the fist of the fleece'.  But the Sages said, '[Even] five ewes [which] supply any [quantity] whatsoever [of wool]'  And to the question,  how much [was meant by] any [quantity] 'whatsoever',  Rab replied: A [total of a] maneh and a half, provided each supplies [no less than] a fifth [of the total quantity]!  — There, [R. Joseph retorted], it would have been proper that [the expression] 'any [quantity] whatsoever' should not have been used [at all]; only because the first Tanna speaks  of a large quantity.  [the Sages] also speak  of a small quantity,  which is described [as] 'any quantity whatsoever'. [It is] obvious [if a person] said, 'My movables [shall be given] to X', [the latter] acquires possession of all the things he used except wheat and barley. [If he said], 'All my movables [shall be given] to X'.[the latter] acquires possession even of wheat and barley and even of the upper millstone,  except the lower millstone.  [If he said], 'All that can be moved', [the latter] acquires possession even of the lower millstone.  The question. [however]. was raised: Is a slave regarded as real estate or as movables!  — R Aha son of R. Awia said to R. Ashi, Come and hear: He who sold a town has [also] sold [its] houses, ditches and caves, [its] bath houses, olive presses and irrigation works, but not the movables [that it contains]. In the case, however,  where he said, 'It and all that it contains', all its contents,  even if it consisted of  cattle or slaves, are sold.  [Now.] if it is granted [that slaves are] like movables, one can well understand why they are not included in the sale in the first [case];  if, however, it is assumed [that] they are like real estate, why are they not included in the sale? — What, then, [is it suggested, that] they are like movables? Why 'even'?  All, however, that can be said in reply  [is that] movables which [can] move [of themselves]  are different from movables that [can] not move;  so also it may be said  [that slaves] are like real estate [but that] real estate that moves is different from real estate that does not move. Rabina said to R. Ashi, Come and hear:  If one gave all his property to his slave, in writing, [the latter] goes forth [as] a free man. [If] he left [for himself] any land whatsoever [the slave] does not go forth [as] a free man. R. Simeon said: [The slave] is always free unless [the master] said, 'All my possessions are given to my slave X, except a ten thousandth part of them'. And R. Dimi b. Joseph said in the name of R. Eleazar: Movables in the case of a slave are regarded as a reservation,  but movables in the case of a kethubah are not regarded as a reservation.  And Raba asked R. Nahman, 'What is the reason?' [To which the latter replied.] 'A slave is [regarded as] movables, and [in the case of] movables,  movables  are regarded as a reservation; the kethubah of a woman, however, is [payable from] real estate,  and [in the case] of real estate, movables  [are] not [regarded as] a reservation.