Bava Batra

accepted. Also if the witnesses to a deed [of sale] say, We only wrote [under reservation of] a moda'ah  their word is not accepted!  — This is the case where they make a verbal statement to this effect, because a verbal statement cannot invalidate a written deed, but if they write a deed,  then one deed can invalidate another. The preceding text states that R. Nahman said: If the witnesses [to a bond] say, We only wrote it [under cover of] an amanah, their word is not accepted, and if the witnesses [to a deed] say, We wrote [it under the reservation of] a moda'ah, their word is not accepted. Mar son of R. Ashi, however, says that if they say, We only wrote [it] under cover of an amanah, their word is not accepted, but if they say, We wrote [under the reservation of] a moda'ah, their word is accepted. The reason is that it is proper to commit to writing a moda'ah, but it is not proper to commit to writing an amanah. THE HUSBAND HAS NO HAZAKAH IN THE PROPERTY OF HIS WIFE. Surely this is self-evident? Since he has a right to the produce [of the wife's field,  therefore, however long he occupies it we say that] he is merely taking the produce?  — The rule required to be stated for the case in which he has made a written declaration that he has no right or claim to her property.  But suppose he has done so, what difference does it make, seeing that it has been taught, If a man says to another, I have no right or claim to this field, I have no concern in it, I totally dissociate myself from it, his words are of no effect?  — In the school of R. Jannai the answer was given that the Mishnah here [is referring to the case] where the husband made this declaration to the wife while she was still only betrothed to him; [and such a declaration would be valid] in virtue of the dictum of R. Kahana