## Bava Batra Daf 104b

###### Bava Batra 104b:1
[Bava Batra 104b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/104b:1)

וְאִי אִיכָּא מִילְּתָא יַתִּירָא, דְּהָוֵי לְתִשְׁעַת קַבִּין – הָדְרִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if** after this calculation **there is** still **a surplus** in excess of a quarter-*kav* per *se’a*, equal in size to an area required **for** the sowing of **nine *kav*** of seed, the entire surplus must be **returned.**


###### Bava Batra 104b:2
[Bava Batra 104b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/104b:2)

אֵיתִיבֵיהּ רָבָא לְרַב נַחְמָן: ״שֶׁאִם שִׁיֵּיר בַּשָּׂדֶה בֵּית תִּשְׁעַת קַבִּין״ – לָאו דְּזַבֵּין לֵיהּ כּוֹרַיִים? לָא, דְּזַבֵּין לֵיהּ כּוֹר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava raised an objection to Rav Naḥman:** The mishna teaches **that if the surplus in the field was an area required for the sowing of nine *kav*** of seed, the buyer returns the land to the seller. **Isn’t this** the *halakha* even in a case **where he sold him** a field measuring **two *kor*?** This would seem to indicate that even if the surplus does not exceed a quarter-*kav* per *se’a*, as a quarter-*kav* per *se’a* in a field of two *kor* is fifteen *kav*, the sole determining factor is whether or not the surplus is equal in size to an area required for the sowing of nine *kav*. Rav Naḥman rejects this argument: **No,** the case in the mishna is specifically **where he sold him a** field measuring one ***kor*.**


###### Bava Batra 104b:3
[Bava Batra 104b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/104b:3)

״וּבַגִּנָּה בֵּית חֲצִי קַב״ – לָאו דְּזַבֵּין לֵיהּ סָאתַיִם? לָא, דְּזַבֵּין לֵיהּ סְאָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rava raised a further objection to Rav Naḥman: We learned in the continuation of the mishna that if the surplus **in a garden** was **an area required for the sowing of a half-*kav*** of seed, the buyer returns the land to the seller. **Isn’t this** the *halakha* even in a case **where he sold him** a garden measuring **two *se’a*?** Once again, this would seem to indicate that the surplus is returned to the seller, provided that it is equal in size to the minimum measure of a garden, even if the surplus does not exceed one-half of a *kav* per two *se’a*, which is equivalent to one-quarter of a *kav* per *se’a*. Rav Naḥman rejects this argument as well: **No,** the case in the mishna is **where he sold him a** garden measuring a ***se’a*,** so that the surplus is proportionately twice as large.


###### Bava Batra 104b:4
[Bava Batra 104b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/104b:4)

״וּכְדִבְרֵי רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, בֵּית רוֹבַע״ – מַאי, לָאו דְּזַבֵּין לֵיהּ סְאָה? לָא, דְּזַבֵּין לֵיהּ חֲצִי סְאָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rava raised yet another objection to Rav Naḥman from the next clause in the mishna, which states: **Or, according to the statement of Rabbi Akiva,** if the surplus in the garden was **an area required for sowing a quarter-*kav* of seed,** the buyer returns the land to the seller. **What, isn’t this** the *halakha* even in a case **where he sold him a** garden measuring **a *se’a*?** In that case, the surplus does not exceed one-quarter of a *kav* per *se’a*, and nevertheless the surplus is returned to the seller, provided that it is equal in size to the minimum measure of a garden. Rav Naḥman also rejects this argument: **No,** the case in the mishna is **where he sold him** a garden measuring **a half-*se’a*,** so that the surplus is proportionately twice as large.


###### Bava Batra 104b:5
[Bava Batra 104b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/104b:5)

בָּעֵי רַב אָשֵׁי: שָׂדֶה – וְנַעֲשֵׂית גִּנָּה; גִּנָּה – וְנַעֲשֵׂיתָ שָׂדֶה, מַאי? תֵּיקוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna teaches that in the case of a field, the buyer can return the land itself if the surplus was an area required for the sowing of nine *kav* of seed, and in the case of a garden, if the surplus was an area required for the sowing of a half-*kav* of seed. **Rav Ashi raises a dilemma:** If one sold **a field and it** turned out that the plot was larger than had been stipulated, but before the buyer returned the surplus, the plot **was turned into a garden, or** if it was initially **a garden and it was turned into a field** (see 11a), **what** is the *halakha*? Is the surplus governed by the *halakhot* applying to a field or by those applying to a garden? The Gemara answers: The dilemma **shall stand** unresolved, as no answer has been found.


###### Bava Batra 104b:6
[Bava Batra 104b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/104b:6)

תָּנָא: אִם הָיָה סָמוּךְ לְשָׂדֵהוּ – אֲפִילּוּ כָּל שֶׁהוּא, מַחֲזִיר לוֹ קַרְקַע.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
A Sage **taught** in a *baraita*: **If** the field being sold **was adjacent to** another **field** belonging to the seller, **then even** if the surplus was of **a minimal** amount, the buyer can **return the land** itself **to** the seller, and the seller cannot demand payment in money. This is because the seller loses nothing when he receives a small tract of land, as he can cultivate it along with his adjoining field.


###### Bava Batra 104b:7
[Bava Batra 104b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/104b:7)

בָּעֵי רַב אָשֵׁי: בּוֹר, מַהוּ שֶׁתַּפְסִיק? אַמַּת הַמַּיִם, מַהוּ שֶׁתַּפְסִיק? דֶּרֶךְ הָרַבִּים, מַהוּ שֶׁתַּפְסִיק? רִיכְבָּא דְּדִיקְלָא, מַהוּ שֶׁתַּפְסִיק? תֵּיקוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Ashi raises** a set of **dilemmas:** With regard to **a pit** between the surplus in the sold field and the adjoining field belonging to the seller, **what is** the *halakha*: **Should** the pit **be** considered **an interposition** between the two fields? With regard to **a water channel** between the two fields, **what is** the *halakha*: **Should** the water channel **be** considered **an interposition?** With regard to **the public thoroughfare, what is** the *halakha*: **Should** the public thoroughfare **be** considered **an interposition?** With regard to **a row of palm trees, what is** the *halakha*: **Should** a row of palm trees **be** considered **an interposition?** The Gemara states: All these dilemmas **shall stand** unresolved.


###### Bava Batra 104b:8
[Bava Batra 104b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/104b:8)

וְלֹא אֶת הָרוֹבַע בִּלְבַד מַחֲזִיר לוֹ, אֶלָּא כָּל הַמּוֹתָר. כְּלַפֵּי לְיָיא? תָּאנֵי רָבִין בַּר רַב נַחְמָן: לֹא אֶת הַמּוֹתָר בִּלְבַד מַחֲזִיר לוֹ, אֶלָּא אֶת כָּל הָרְבָעִין כּוּלָּן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches that if the surplus is greater than a quarter-*kav* per *se’a*, **it is not only the quarter-***kav* **that** the buyer **returns; rather,** he returns **all of the surplus.** Since he is already required to make a refund, the refund must be made in the precise amount. The Gemara raises a question: **Isn’t it the opposite** [***kelappei layya***]? The buyer is required to return the surplus even when the quarters of a *kav* remain in his possession. **Ravin bar Rav Naḥman taught** the mishna as follows: **Not only must** the buyer **return the extra** land that is beyond the limit of a quarter*-kav* area per *beit se’a*, **but he must** also **return to him every one of the** extra **quarter-***kav* areas of land that he received beyond the stated area of a *beit kor*. When he is required to return the surplus, he returns not only the surplus, but also all the quarter-*kav* areas over and above what had originally been stipulated to be included in the sale.


###### Bava Batra 104b:9
[Bava Batra 104b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/104b:9)

**מַתְנִי׳** ״מִדָּה בְּחֶבֶל אֲנִי מוֹכֵר לָךְ, הֵן חָסֵר הֵן יָתֵר״ – בִּטֵּל ״הֵן חָסֵר הֵן יָתֵר״ ״מִדָּה בְּחֶבֶל״. ״הֵן חָסֵר הֵן יָתֵר, מִדָּה בְּחֶבֶל״ –

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** If the seller says to the buyer: **I am selling you** a plot of land of a certain size **measured** precisely **with a rope more or less,** thereby attaching to the sale two contradictory stipulations; in this case, the words: **More or less, nullify** the words: **Measured** precisely **with a rope.** Accordingly, if the surplus did not exceed a quarter-*kav* per *se’a*, the sale is valid as is. Similarly, if the seller says to the buyer: I am selling you a plot of land of a certain size **more or less measured** precisely **with a rope,**