Ketubot

because [the quantity of] pulse for a sela' [is in exactly the same proportion as] that for one perutah.This is conclusive. How is thisto be understood? If it be suggested [that it refers] to a place where [pulse] is sold by conjectural estimate, does not one [it may be objected] who pays a sela' obtain the commodity at a much cheaper rate?— R. Papa replied: [It refers] to a place where each kannais soldfor one perutah. Come and hear: IF HER KETHUBAH WAS FOR FOUR HUNDRED ZUZ AND SHE SOLD [PLOTS OF LAND] TO [THREE] PERSONSTO EACH FOR ONE MANEH, AND TO A FOURTH[SHE SOLD] WHAT WAS WORTH A MANEH AND A DENAR FOR ONE MANEH [THE SALE] TO THE LAST PERSON IS VOID BUT [THE SALES] OF ALL THE OTHERS ARE VALID!— [Thisis no proof, for] as R. Shisha the son of R. Idi replied[that the final clause of our Mishnah deals] with small plots of land,[so it may] in this discussionalso [be argued that the clause cited deals] with small plots of land. It is obvious [that if a man] instructed [his agent to sell a plot of land] to one person but not to two persons [and he sold it to two' the sale is invalidfor] he distinctly told him, 'To one person but not to two persons'.What, [however, is the ruling where] he gave instructions [that the sale shall be made] to one person without mentioning any further limitation?R. Huna ruled: 'To one person' implies 'but not to two'.Both R. Hisda and Rabbah son of R. Huna, however, ruled: 'To one person'may mean even to two;'to one', may meaneven to a hundred.R. Nahman once happened to be at Surawhen R. Hisda and Rabbah b. R. Huna came to visit him. 'What [is the ruling], they asked him, in such a case?'— To one', he replied, [may mean] even to two, 'to one' may mean even to a hundred. '[Are the sales valid,]' they asked him, 'even where the agent made an error?'— 'I do not speak', he replied, 'of a case where the agent had made an error'. 'But did not a Master', they asked again, 'say [that the law of] overreaching does not apply to landed property'?Thisapplies only where the owner made the error; but where the agent has made the error [the owner] might tell him, 'I sent you to improve my position but not to impair it'.Whence, however, is it inferred that a distinction may be drawn between the agent and the owner? — [From] what we have learned, 'If a man tells his agent, "Go and give terumah", the latter must give the terumah in accordance with the disposition of the owner,and if he does not know the owner's disposition, he should give the terumah in a moderate manner, viz., one fiftieth.If he reduced [the denominator by] tenor added ten to ithis terumah is nevertheless valid',while in respect of an ownerit was taught: If, when setting apart terumah, there came up in his hand even so much as one twentiethhis terumah is valid. Come and hear: IF HER KETHUBAH WAS FOR FOUR HUNDRED ZUZ AND SHE SOLD [PLOTS OF LAND] TO [THREE] PERSONSTO EACH FOR ONE MANEH, AND TO A FOURTH[SHE SOLD] WHAT WAS WORTH A MANEH AND A DENAR FOR ONE MANEH, [THE SALE] TO THE LAST PERSON IS VOID BUT [THE SALES] OF ALL OTHERS ARE VALID.R. Shisha the son of R. Ishi replied: [This clause deals] with small plots of land. MISHNAH. IF AN ASSESSMENT OF THE JUDGESWAS BY ONE SIXTH LESS, OR BY ONE SIXTH MORE [THAN THE ACTUAL VALUE OF THE PROPERTY]. THEIR SALE IS VOID. R. SIMEON B. GAMALIEL RULED: THEIR SALE IS VALID FOR, OTHERWISE,OF WHAT ADVANTAGE WOULD THE POWER OF A COURT BE? IF A BILL FOR INSPECTION,HOWEVER, HAS BEEN DRAWN UP, THEIR SALE IS VALID EVEN IF THEY SOLD FOR TWO HUNDRED ZUZWHAT WAS WORTH ONE MANEH,OR FOR ONE MANEH WHAT WAS WORTH TWO HUNDRED ZUZ. GEMARA. The question was asked: What is the legal status ofan agent?—