Bava Batra

have only themselves to blame. But did Rab indeed give this ruling? Have we not learnt [in a Mishnah]: If a man lends money to another on a bond, he may recover his debt even from property on which there is a lien  [supposing there are no free assets]; if, however, the loan was made only in the presence of witnesses, he may only recover from property on which there is no lien? And should you answer that Rab is himself [considered] a Tanna and may dispute [the ruling of a Mishnah], this can hardly be, since Rab and Samuel have both laid down that a loan [contracted] by word of mouth  cannot be recovered either from the heirs [of the debtor] or from those who have [subsequently] purchased [from him].  — Are you arguing from a loan to a sale? When a man borrows money, he does so as secretly as possible, in order that his property may not depreciate.  If he sells land, however, he does so as publicly as possible, in order that people may know about it. Our Rabbis taught: If the father  occupies  [the field] a year and the son two years, or the father two years and the son one year, or the father one year, the son one year and the purchaser  one year, such occupation confers a title of ownership. Now this would indicate, would it not, that when a man purchases [a piece of land] it becomes generally known?  But this would seem to conflict [with the following]: If a man occupies a field in the lifetime of the father  one year and two years in the lifetime of the son, or two years in the lifetime of the father and one year in the lifetime of the son, or one year in the lifetime of the father, one year in the lifetime of the son, and one year in the lifetime of the purchaser,  such occupation confers a title of ownership. Now if you assume that the purchase [of a piece of land] becomes generally known, surely there can be no protest stronger than this, [that the son has sold the land]?  — R. Papa said: The case of which this passage speaks is where the son sells all his fields without specifying [any one in particular]. MISHNAH. CRAFTSMEN,  PARTNERS, METAYERS, AND TRUSTEES HAVE NO HAZAKAH.  A MAN HAS NO HAZAKAH IN THE PROPERTY OF HIS WIFE NOR HAS A WOMAN HAZAKAH IN THE PROPERTY OF HER HUSBAND. A FATHER HAS NO HAZAKAH IN THE PROPERTY OF HIS SON NOR HAS A SON HAZAKAH IN THE PROPERTY OF HIS FATHER. THESE STATEMENTS APPLY ONLY TO CASES [WHERE OWNERSHIP IS CLAIMED] ON THE GROUND OF POSSESSION. IN THE CASE, HOWEVER, WHERE LAND IS PRESENTED AS A GIFT, OR OF BROTHERS DIVIDING AN INHERITANCE, OR OF ONE WHO SEIZES THE PROPERTY OF A PROSELYTE,  OWNERSHIP CAN BE CLAIMED AS SOON AS THE FIRST STEP HAS BEEN TAKEN TOWARDS MAKING A DOOR OR A FENCE OR AN OPENING.