Bava Batra 41A

סתמא מאי? רבינא אמר: לא חיישינן, רב אשי אמר: חיישינן. והלכתא: חיישינן:

What is the status of a document detailing a gift that is without specification as to whether the giver desired that it be publicized? Ravina says: We are not concerned that it may be a concealed gift, and Rav Ashi says: We are concerned. And the halakha is that we are concerned.

מתני׳ כל חזקה שאין עמה טענה, אינה חזקה. כיצד? אמר לו: ״מה אתה עושה בתוך שלי?״ והוא אמר לו: ״שלא אמר לי אדם דבר מעולם״⁠ – אינה חזקה.

Mishnah: Any possession that is not accompanied by a claim explaining how the possessor became the owner is not sufficient to establish the presumption of ownership. How so? If the prior owner said to the possessor: What are you doing in my land? And the possessor said to him in response: I am in possession of the land because no person ever said anything to me about my being here, i.e., he states no valid claim as to why he would be the owner of the land, his mere use is not sufficient to establish the presumption of ownership.

״שמכרת לי״; ״שנתת לי במתנה״; ״אביך מכרה לי״; ״אביך נתנה לי במתנה״⁠ – הרי זו חזקה. והבא משום ירושה ⁠– אינו צריך טענה.

But if the possessor claimed: I am in possession of the land because you sold it to me, or: Because you gave it to me as a gift, or: Because your father sold it to me, or: Because your father gave it to me as a gift, these are valid claims to ownership. In these cases, his possession is sufficient to establish the presumption of ownership. And one who comes to claim the land based on inheritance does not need a claim explaining why his ancestors had a right to the land.

גמ׳ פשיטא!

Talmud: The Talmud asks: Why does the Mishnah need to say this? Isn’t it obvious that one cannot establish the presumption of ownership absent a claim of ownership?