כתובות 109:2 — Soncino English Talmud

but judges may sign even though they have not read it. IF [THE SELLER] MADE IT A [BOUNDARY] MARK FOR ANOTHER PERSON. Abaye said: This was taught Only [where it was] FOR ANOTHER PERSON, but [if it was made a boundary mark] for himself he does not lose his right; for he can say, 'Had I not done that for him he would not have sold the field to me'. What [possible objection can] you have? That he should have made a declaration [to that effect]? Your friend [it can be retorted] has a friend, and the friend of your friend has a friend. A certain man once made a field a [boundary] mark for another person, [and one of the witnesses,] having contested [its ownership,] died, when a guardian was appointed [over his estate]. The guardian came to Abaye who quoted to him: 'IF [THE SELLER] MADE IT A [BOUNDARY] MARK FOR ANOTHER PERSON [THE CONTESTANT] HAS LOST HIS RIGHT'. 'If the father of the orphans had been alive', the other retorted, 'could he not have pleaded, "l have conceded to him only one furrow"?' — 'You speak well', he said, 'for R. Johanan stated, If he submitted the plea, "l have conceded to you only one furrow", he is believed'. 'Proceed at any rate [Abaye later told the guardian] to give him one furrow'. On that [furrow, however,] there was a nursery of palm trees, and [the guardian] said to him, 'Had the father of the orphans been alive, could he not have submitted the plea, "I have re-purchased it from him"?' — 'You speak well', [Abaye] said to him, 'for R. Johanan ruled, If he submitted the plea, "I have re-purchased it from him" he is believed'. Said Abaye: Anyone who appoints a guardian should appoint one like this man who understands how to turn [the scales] in favour of orphans. MISHNAH. IF A MAN WENT TO A COUNTRY BEYOND THE SEA AND [IN HIS ABSENCE] THE PATH TO HIS FIELD WAS LOST, ADMON RULED: LET HIM WALK [TO HIS FIELD] BY THE SHORTEST WAY. THE SAGES, HOWEVER, RULED: LET HIM EITHER PURCHASE A PATH FOR HIMSELF EVEN THOUGH IT [COST HIM] A HUNDRED MANEH OR FLY THROUGH THE AIR. GEMARA. What is the Rabbis' reason? Does not Admon speak well? — Rab Judah replied in the name of Rab: [The ruling refers to a field], for instance, which [the fields of] four persons surrounded on its four sides. If that be so, what can be Admon's reason? — Raba explained: Where four persons succeeded [to the adjacent fields] by virtue of the rights of four [persons respectively] or where four persons succeeded [to them] by virtue of one, all agree that these may turn him away. They only differ where one person succeeded [to all the surrounding fields] by virtue of four persons. Admon is of the opinion that [the claimant can say to that person,] 'At all events my path is in your territory'; and the Rabbis hold the opinion [that the defendant might retort,] 'If you will keep quiet, well and good, but if not I will return the deeds to their respective original owners whom you will have no chance of calling to law'. A [dying man] once instructed [those around him] that a palm tree shall be given to his daughters but the orphans proceeded to divide the estate and gave her no palm tree. R. Joseph [in considering the case] intended to lay down that it involved the very same principle as that of our Mishnah. But Abaye said to him: Are [the two] alike? There, each one can send [the claimant to the path] away; but here, the palm tree is in their common possession. What is their way out? — They must give her a palm tree and divide [the estate] all over again. A [dying man] once instructed [those around him] that a palm tree shall be given to his daughter. When he died he left two halves of a palm tree. Sat R. Ashi [discussing the case] and grappled with this difficulty; Do people call two halves of palms trees a palm tree' or not? — Said R. Mordecai to R. Ashi, Thus said Abimi of Hagronia in the name of Raba: People do call two halves of palm trees 'a palm tree'. ^ᵃ^ᵇ^ᶜ^ᵈ^ᵉ^ᶠ^ᵍ^ʰ^ⁱ^ʲ^ᵏ^ˡ^ᵐ^ⁿ^ᵒ^ᵖ^ᵠ^ʳ^ˢ^ᵗ^ᵘ^ᵛ^ʷ^ˣ^ʸ^ᶻ^ᵃᵃ^ᵃᵇ^ᵃᶜ^ᵃᵈ^ᵃᵉ^ᵃᶠ^ᵃᵍ^ᵃʰ^ᵃⁱ^ᵃʲ^ᵃᵏ^ᵃˡ^ᵃᵐ^ᵃⁿ^ᵃᵒ^ᵃᵖ^ᵃᵠ^ᵃʳ^ᵃˢ^ᵃᵗ^ᵃᵘ^ᵃᵛ^ᵃʷ

^ᵃnote:Cf. supra n. 13.
^ᵇnote:A judge's signature on a deed consequently does not prove that beyond the Signatures of the witnesses he was at all aware of its contents.
^ᶜnote:Sc. if the contestant himself bought a field from the man whom he accuses of having stolen an adjacent field from him, and the latter, inserting the field in dispute as a boundary, described it as his own.
^ᵈnote:Lit., 'thus', i.e., agreed to the description of the stolen field as the property of the seller.
^ᵉnote:Against this plea.
^ᶠnote:Popular saying. The declaration would eventually reach the ears of the seller who might in consequence cancel the sale.
^ᵍnote:Which he was accused of having stolen.
^ʰnote:To whom he had sold a field adjacent to it.
^ⁱnote:Cf. supra p. 699, n. I.
^ʲnote:To manage it for the orphans.
^ᵏnote:To claim the field on behalf of his wards.
^ˡnote:Of the field in dispute.
^ᵐnote:That was immediately next to the sold field. The orphans should, therefore, be entitled to reclaim the rest of the field.
^ⁿnote:After proof had been adduced that the field had been stolen from the father of the orphans.
^ᵒnote:The minimum which the deceased must have conceded.
^ᵖnote:After it had been ascribed to him.
^ᵠnote:[The reason for this ruling. according to Rashi, is because the field is known to have belonged to the contestant and but for his signature referred to, the present occupier has no proof of his title to the field. This admission on the part of the contestant is, however, cancelled by his declaration of having repurchased the field, v. supra 16a.]
^ʳnote:Lit.,'to turn over'.
^ˢnote:It being unknown in which of the surrounding fields it lay.
^ᵗnote:He must be allowed a short path through one of the surrounding fields. (This is further explained infra).
^ᵘnote:The minimum. He cannot claim more than what is, at all events, due to him.
^ᵛnote:THE SAGES.
^ʷnote:The assumption now being that all the surrounding fields belonged to one person who must obviously be held responsible for the lost path.
^ˣnote:In our Mishnah.
^ʸnote:So that each person can shift responsibility on the others.
^ᶻnote:How can one be held responsible when all the four are equally involved?
^ᵃᵃnote:The respective owners of the four surrounding fields.
^ᵃᵇnote:Lit., 'came'.
^ᵃᶜnote:Sc. by purchase or gift.
^ᵃᵈnote:After the path was lost.
^ᵃᵉnote:Cf. supra note 8.
^ᵃᶠnote:Admon and the Sages.
^ᵃᵍnote:Lit., 'came'.
^ᵃʰnote:Sc. by purchase or gift.
^ᵃⁱnote:In whichever field the path was lost.
^ᵃʲnote:Lit., 'you will keep quiet' (bis). He will sell him a path at a reasonable price (cf. Rashi). V. however, Tosaf. Yeb. 37b, s.v. [H].
^ᵃᵏnote:Lit., 'and you will not be able to talk law with them'. Cf supra p. 701, n. 8.
^ᵃˡnote:The verbal instructions of one in such circumstances have the force of a legally written document.
^ᵃᵐnote:Like the owners of the adjacent fields each of whom shifts the responsibility for the path on to the others. so can each brother shift the responsibility for the palms tree on to the other brothers.
^ᵃⁿnote:The case in our Mishnah.
^ᵃᵒnote:The One path can lie only in one person's held, and each of the defendants can, therefore, well plead that it did not lie in his.
^ᵃᵖnote:Lit., 'with them', the instructions of the deceased having been given before the division of the estate, and the duty of carrying out his wish is incumbent upon all the heirs jointly.
^ᵃᵠnote:Lit., 'their correction', 'redress'.
^ᵃʳnote:Lit., 'from the beginning'.
^ᵃˢnote:V. supra note 2.
^ᵃᵗnote:Among his many palm trees.
^ᵃᵘnote:Sc. two palm trees in each of which he owned a half, and the heirs desired to assign them to the daughter in fulfilment of their father's instructions.
^ᵃᵛnote:One of the suburbs of Nehardea.
^ᵃʷnote:And the brothers can assign these to the daughter despite the greater trouble involved in their cultivation.