Study Bava Batra folio 53B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
לקנות אותה ואת חברתה – אותה קנה, חברתה לא קנה. לקנות את חברתה – אף אותה לא קנה.
If his intention was to acquire it and also acquire the other field, he has acquired the first field, but has not acquired the other field, since the fields are separated by a boundary. If he took possession of one field in order to acquire only the other field, he has not acquired even that field of which he took possession, since his intention when taking possession was to acquire the other field, and one does not acquire an item without the intention to do so.
בעי רבי זירא: החזיק באחת מהן לקנות אותה, ואת המצר, ואת חברתה – מהו? מי אמרינן: מצר דארעא חד הוא, וקני; או דלמא האי לחודיה קאי והאי לחודיה קאי? תיקו.
R' Zeira raises a dilemma: What is the halakha if one took possession of one of the fields in order to acquire it, and the boundary, and the other field, all together? Do we say that the boundary of the land is one, i.e., these two fields are joined by means of their common boundary, and therefore he has acquired all of them? Or perhaps this field stands alone and that field stands alone. The Talmud notes that the dilemma should stand unresolved.
בעי רבי אלעזר: החזיק במצר לקנות שתיהן, מהו? מי אמרינן האי מצר – אפסרא דארעא הוא, וקני; או דלמא האי לחודיה קאי והאי לחודיה קאי? תיקו.
R' Elazar raises a dilemma: What is the halakha if one took possession of the boundary between the two fields in order to acquire both of the fields? Do we say that the legal status of this boundary is that of the halter of the land and he acquires the fields, just as one acquires an animal through the acquisition of its halter? Or perhaps this field stands alone and that field stands alone, as the boundary is not connected to the field in the same manner that a halter is connected to an animal. The Talmud notes that the dilemma should stand unresolved.