## Bava Batra Daf 27b

###### Bava Batra 27b:1
[Bava Batra 27b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/27b:1)

וְנִקְנִין עִמָּהּ נְכָסִים שֶׁאֵין לָהֶם אַחְרָיוּת! הָכָא בְּמַאי עָסְקִינַן – בְּחִיטֵּי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**and he can acquire property that does not serve as a guarantee,** i.e., movable property, along **with it.** There are specific modes of acquisition for movable property, but if one is acquiring any amount of land at the same time as the movable property, the mode of acquisition employed to acquire the land suffices for the acquisition of the movable property as well. Apparently, any amount of land is subject to first fruits, whereas according to Ulla a tree acquired with less than sixteen cubits of land surrounding it draws nourishment from the land surrounding it and is exempt from first fruits. The Gemara rejects this: **With what are we dealing here?** We are dealing **with wheat,** which is subject to the *halakhot* of first fruits and requires very little land to nourish it.


###### Bava Batra 27b:2
[Bava Batra 27b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/27b:2)

דַּיְקָא נָמֵי, דְּקָתָנֵי: כׇּל שֶׁהוּא. שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara comments that the language of the mishna **is also precise, as it teaches:** Land **of any** size, which indicates even a miniscule amount, and all normal trees certainly require more land than that. The Gemara affirms: **Learn from it** that it is so.


###### Bava Batra 27b:3
[Bava Batra 27b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/27b:3)

תָּא שְׁמַע: אִילָן – מִקְצָתוֹ בָּאָרֶץ וּמִקְצָתוֹ בְּחוּץ לָאָרֶץ – טֶבֶל וְחוּלִּין מְעוֹרָבִין זֶה בָּזֶה, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara further suggests: **Come** and **hear** a proof from a *baraita* (*Tosefta*, *Ma’asrot* 2:22): If there is **a tree, part of which is in Eretz** Yisrael **and part of which is outside of Eretz** Yisrael, it is considered as though **untithed produce,** i.e., produce that is subject to the *halakhot* of *terumot* and tithes, **and non-sacred produce,** i.e., produce that is exempt from the *halakhot* of *terumot* and tithes, **are mixed together** in each one of this tree’s fruits. This is **the statement of Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi.


###### Bava Batra 27b:4
[Bava Batra 27b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/27b:4)

רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר: הַגָּדֵל בְּחִיּוּב – חַיָּיב, הַגָּדֵל בִּפְטוּר – פָּטוּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says:** With regard to the fruits in the part of the tree that is **growing in** a place where there is **an obligation** to separate tithes, i.e., in Eretz Yisrael, the owner is **obligated** to separate tithes. With regard to the fruits that are **growing in** a place where there is **an exemption** from separating tithes, i.e., outside of Eretz Yisrael, the owner is **exempt.**


###### Bava Batra 27b:5
[Bava Batra 27b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/27b:5)

עַד כָּאן לָא פְּלִיגִי, אֶלָּא דְּמָר סָבַר: יֵשׁ בְּרֵירָה, וּמַר סָבַר: אֵין בְּרֵירָה;

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara comments: **They disagree only in that** one **Sage,** Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, **holds** that **there is** retroactive **designation,** and therefore it is assumed that the nourishment drawn from Eretz Yisrael sustained the fruit that grew on that side of the tree, and the nourishment drawn from outside Eretz Yisrael sustained the fruit that grew there. **And** one **Sage,** Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, **holds** that **there is no** retroactive **designation,** and the fruit is considered mixed.


###### Bava Batra 27b:6
[Bava Batra 27b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/27b:6)

אֲבָל גָּדֵל בִּפְטוּר – דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל פָּטוּר!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**But** if the tree **grew** entirely **in** a place where there is **an exemption** from separating tithes, i.e., outside Eretz Yisrael, **all agree** that the owner is **exempt,** even though the tree might have roots within sixteen cubits of Eretz Yisrael and draw nourishment from there. This presents a difficulty for the opinion of Ulla, as he claims that the place from where a tree draws its nourishment is decisive with regard to first fruits.


###### Bava Batra 27b:7
[Bava Batra 27b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/27b:7)

הָכָא בְּמַאי עָסְקִינַן – דְּמַפְסִיק צוּנְמָא. אִי הָכִי, מַאי טַעְמֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי? דְּהָדְרִי עׇרְבִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **With what are we dealing here?** We are dealing with a case **where a rock divides** the roots up to the trunk, and therefore it is possible to distinguish between the parts of the tree that draw nutrients from Eretz Yisrael and the parts that draw nutrients from outside of Eretz Yisrael. The Gemara asks: **If so, what is the reasoning of Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi? Why does he view the fruits as being a mixture? The Gemara answers: He holds that although there is a division between the roots, they cannot be distinguished from one another, **as they then become mixed** in the body of the tree.


###### Bava Batra 27b:8
[Bava Batra 27b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/27b:8)

וּבְמַאי קָא מִיפַּלְגִי? מָר סָבַר: אַוֵּירָא מְבַלְבֵּל, וּמָר סָבַר: הַאי לְחוֹדֵיהּ קָאֵי וְהַאי לְחוֹדֵיהּ קָאֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And with regard to what** principle **do they disagree?** The Gemara answers: One **Sage,** Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, **holds: The air** above the ground **mixes** the nutrients, **and** one **Sage,** Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, **holds: This** part of the tree **stands alone and this** part of the tree **stands alone.** From the roots up to the branches, it is as if the tree were cut along the line of the border.


###### Bava Batra 27b:9
[Bava Batra 27b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/27b:9)

וְשֵׁשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה אַמָּה – וְתוּ לָא? וְהָא תְּנַן: מַרְחִיקִין אֶת הָאִילָן מִן הַבּוֹר, עֶשְׂרִים וְחָמֵשׁ אַמָּה! אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: מֵיזָל – טוּבָא אָזְלִי, אַכְחוֹשֵׁי לָא מַכְחֲשִׁי אֶלָּא עַד שֵׁשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה אַמָּה, טְפֵי לָא מַכְחֲשִׁי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara raises a difficulty against Ulla’s opinion from a different perspective: **And** do roots extend **sixteen cubits and no more? Didn’t we learn** in a mishna (25b): **One must distance a tree twenty-five cubits from a cistern?** This indicates that tree roots reach more than sixteen cubits. **Abaye said:** The roots **extend farther,** but **they weaken the ground only up to sixteen cubits;** with regard to an area any **more** distant than that, **they do not weaken** the ground.


###### Bava Batra 27b:10
[Bava Batra 27b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/27b:10)

כִּי אֲתָא רַב דִּימִי אָמַר, בְּעָא מִינֵּיהּ רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ מֵרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: אִילָן הַסָּמוּךְ לַמֶּיצֶר בְּתוֹךְ שֵׁשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה אַמָּה, מַהוּ? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: גַּזְלָן הוּא, וְאֵין מְבִיאִין מִמֶּנּוּ בִּכּוּרִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Concerning this matter the Gemara relates that **when Rav Dimi came** from Eretz Yisrael **he said: Reish Lakish raised a dilemma before Rabbi Yoḥanan:** With regard to **a tree** that is **within sixteen cubits of a boundary, what is** the *halakha*? Rabbi Yoḥanan **said to him:** The owner **is a robber, and one does not bring first fruits from it.**


###### Bava Batra 27b:11
[Bava Batra 27b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/27b:11)

כִּי אֲתָא רָבִין אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: אֶחָד אִילָן הַסָּמוּךְ לַמֶּיצֶר, וְאֶחָד אִילָן הַנּוֹטֶה – מֵבִיא וְקוֹרֵא; שֶׁעַל מְנָת כֵּן הִנְחִיל יְהוֹשֻׁעַ לְיִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת הָאָרֶץ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
By contrast, **when Ravin came** from Eretz Yisrael, he related that **Rabbi Yoḥanan says: Both** in the case of **a tree that is close to a boundary and a tree that leans** into a neighbor’s yard, **one brings** first fruits **and recites** the verses, **as it was on this condition that Joshua apportioned Eretz** Yisrael **to the Jewish people,** i.e., that they would not be particular about such matters.


###### Bava Batra 27b:12
[Bava Batra 27b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/27b:12)

**מַתְנִי׳** אִילָן שֶׁהוּא נוֹטֶה לִשְׂדֵה חֲבֵירוֹ – קוֹצֵץ מְלֹא הַמַּרְדֵּעַ, עַל גַּבֵּי הַמַּחֲרֵישָׁה. וּבֶחָרוּב וּבַשִּׁקְמָה – כְּנֶגֶד הַמִּשְׁקוֹלֶת. בֵּית הַשְּׁלָחִין – כׇּל הָאִילָן כְּנֶגֶד הַמִּשְׁקוֹלֶת. אַבָּא שָׁאוּל אוֹמֵר: כׇּל אִילַן סְרָק כְּנֶגֶד הַמִּשְׁקוֹלֶת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** With regard to **a tree that leans into the field of another,** the neighbor **may cut** the branches **to the height of an ox goad** raised **over the plow,** in places where the land is to be plowed, so that the branches do not impede the use of the plow. **And** in the case **of a carob tree and** the case **of a sycamore tree,** whose abundance of branches cast shade that is harmful to plants, all the branches overhanging one’s property may be removed **along the plumb line,** i.e., along a line perpendicular to the boundary separating the fields. And if the neighbor’s field is **an irrigated field, all** branches of **the tree** are removed **along the plumb line. Abba Shaul says: All barren trees** are cut **along the plumb line.**


###### Bava Batra 27b:13
[Bava Batra 27b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/27b:13)

**גְּמָ׳** אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: אַבָּא שָׁאוּל – אַרֵישָׁא קָאֵי, אוֹ אַסֵּיפָא קָאֵי?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** **A dilemma was raised before them:** Is **Abba Shaul referring to the first clause** of the mishna, which states that a tree extending into a neighbor’s field is cut only to the height of an ox goad, and Abba Shaul maintains that barren trees have the same *halakha* as carob and sycamore trees in that they are cut along the plumb line? **Or** is he **referring to the latter clause,** which discusses an irrigated field, and he permits cutting only barren trees along the plumb line, but not fruit trees?


###### Bava Batra 27b:14
[Bava Batra 27b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/27b:14)

תָּא שְׁמַע, דְּתַנְיָא: בֵּית הַשְּׁלָחִין – אַבָּא שָׁאוּל אוֹמֵר: כׇּל הָאִילָן כְּנֶגֶד הַמִּשְׁקוֹלֶת, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהַצֵּל רַע לְבֵית הַשְּׁלָחִין. שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ: אַרֵישָׁא קָאֵי! שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **Come** and **hear** a resolution to this dilemma, **as it is taught** in a *baraita*: With regard to **an irrigated field, Abba Shaul says: All** types of **trees** are cut **along the plumb line, because the shade is harmful to an irrigated field.** This shows that he does not dispute the *halakha* of the latter clause. **Learn from it** that **he is referring to the first clause** of the mishna. The Gemara affirms: **Learn from it** that it is so.


###### Bava Batra 27b:15
[Bava Batra 27b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/27b:15)

אָמַר רַב אָשֵׁי: מַתְנִיתִין נָמֵי דַּיְקָא, דְּקָתָנֵי: ״כׇּל אִילַן סְרָק״. אִי אָמְרַתְּ בִּשְׁלָמָא אַרֵישָׁא קָאֵי – הַיְינוּ דְּקָתָנֵי כׇּל אִילָן; אֶלָּא אִי אָמְרַתְּ אַסֵּיפָא קָאֵי, אִילַן סְרָק מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ?! אֶלָּא לָאו שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ אַרֵישָׁא קָאֵי? שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Ashi said** that the wording of **the mishna is also precise, as it teaches: All barren trees. Granted, if you say** that Abba Shaul **is referring to the first clause** of the mishna, **this** is the reason **that** Abba Shaul **teaches: All** barren **trees. But if you say** that **he is referring to the latter clause, he should have** said simply: **Barren trees,** as the first *tanna* permits one to cut down any type of tree. **Rather, isn’t it** correct to **conclude from it** that he is **referring to the first clause?** The Gemara affirms: **Learn from it** that it is so.


###### Bava Batra 27b:16
[Bava Batra 27b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/27b:16)

**מַתְנִי׳** אִילָן שֶׁהוּא נוֹטֶה לִרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים, קוֹצֵץ כְּדֵי שֶׁיְּהֵא גָּמָל עוֹבֵר – וְרוֹכְבוֹ. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: גָּמָל טָעוּן פִּשְׁתָּן אוֹ חֲבִילֵי זְמוֹרוֹת. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: כׇּל הָאִילָן כְּנֶגֶד הַמִּשְׁקוֹלֶת, מִפְּנֵי הַטּוּמְאָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** With regard to **a tree that extends into the public domain, one cuts** its branches **so that a camel can pass** beneath the tree **with its rider** sitting on it. **Rabbi Yehuda says:** One cuts enough branches that **a camel loaded with flax or bundles of branches** can pass beneath it. **Rabbi Shimon says:** One cuts **all** branches of **the tree that** extend into the public domain **along the plumb line,** so that they do not hang over the public area at all, **due to ritual impurity.**


###### Bava Batra 27b:17
[Bava Batra 27b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/27b:17)

**גְּמָ׳** מַאן תְּנָא דְּבִנְזָקִין – בָּתַר אוּמְדָּנָא דְּהַשְׁתָּא אָזְלִינַן?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The Gemara asks: **Who** is the *tanna* who **taught** that **with regard to damage** one **follows the current assessment,** and future damage is not taken into account? The mishna states that the tree’s branches are cut to the height of a camel and its rider or load but no more, despite the fact that they will certainly grow again.


###### Bava Batra 27b:18
[Bava Batra 27b:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/27b:18)

אָמַר רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ: בְּמַחֲלוֹקֶת שְׁנוּיָה, וְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר הִיא – דִּתְנַן: אֵין עוֹשִׂין חָלָל תַּחַת רְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים – בּוֹרוֹת, שִׁיחִין וּמְעָרוֹת. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר מַתִּיר, בִּכְדֵי שֶׁתְּהֵא עֲגָלָה מְהַלֶּכֶת – וּטְעוּנַהּ אֲבָנִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Reish Lakish says:** This *halakha* **is taught as a dispute, and it is** the opinion of **Rabbi Eliezer. As we learned** in a mishna (60a): One **may not make** an empty **space beneath the public domain** by digging **pits, ditches, or caves. Rabbi Eliezer permits** one to dig a pit if it is subsequently covered with material strong **enough that a wagon loaded with stones can travel on it** without it collapsing. If the cover can withstand such weight when the pit is dug, it is permitted, despite the fact that the cover might eventually rot.


###### Bava Batra 27b:19
[Bava Batra 27b:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/27b:19)

רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: אֲפִילּוּ תֵּימָא רַבָּנַן, הָתָם – זִימְנִין דְּמַפְחִית וְלָאו אַדַּעְתֵּיהּ, אֲבָל הָכָא – קַמָּא קַמָּא קָא קְיִיץ לֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Yoḥanan said: You** may **even say** that the mishna here represents the opinion of **the Rabbis,** who prohibit one from digging beneath the public domain under any circumstances. The difference is that **there,** the cover **will occasionally deteriorate, and** as this matter is **not on his mind** it will cause damage. **But here,** as **each** branch grows **he cuts it off.** Since the potential cause of damage is visible, there is no concern that it might be neglected.


###### Bava Batra 27b:20
[Bava Batra 27b:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/27b:20)

רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: גָּמָל טָעוּן פִּשְׁתָּן אוֹ חֲבִילֵי זְמוֹרוֹת. אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: שִׁיעוּרָא דְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה נְפִישׁ, אוֹ דִּלְמָא שִׁיעוּרָא דְרַבָּנַן נְפִישׁ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches that if the branches of a tree extend into the public domain, one may cut them to allow a camel and its rider to pass underneath; **Rabbi Yehuda says:** One cuts enough branches that **a camel loaded with flax or bundles of branches** can pass beneath it. **A dilemma was raised before** the Sages: Is **Rabbi Yehuda’s measure greater, or** is **perhaps the Rabbis’ measure greater?** Which reaches a greater height, a camel and rider or a camel loaded with flax?


###### Bava Batra 27b:21
[Bava Batra 27b:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/27b:21)

פְּשִׁיטָא דְּשִׁיעוּרָא דְרַבָּנַן נְפִישׁ! דְּאִי סָלְקָא דַּעְתָּךְ שִׁיעוּרָא דְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה נְפִישׁ, רַבָּנַן – בְּשִׁיעוּרָא דְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה הֵיכִי עָבְדִי? וְאֶלָּא מַאי, שִׁיעוּרָא דְרַבָּנַן נְפִישׁ? רַבִּי יְהוּדָה – בְּשִׁיעוּרָא דְּרַבָּנַן מַאי עָבֵיד? אֶפְשָׁר דִּגְחִין וְחָלֵיף תּוּתֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: It is **obvious that the Rabbis’ measure** is **greater, as, if it enters your mind** that **Rabbi Yehuda’s measure** is **greater, how would the Rabbis act in** the circumstance of **Rabbi Yehuda’s measure?** It is clear that a camel will have to pass beneath the tree with a burden, and it would not be able to do so. The Gemara expresses surprise at this claim: **Rather, what** then would you say? That **the Rabbis’ measure** is **greater?** If so, **how would Rabbi Yehuda act in** the circumstance of **the Rabbis’ measure?** It is also clear that a camel will have to pass there with its rider. The Gemara answers: **It is possible for** the rider **to bend over and to pass underneath** the branches.


###### Bava Batra 27b:22
[Bava Batra 27b:22](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/27b:22)

רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: כׇּל הָאִילָן כְּנֶגֶד הַמִּשְׁקוֹלֶת, מִפְּנֵי הַטּוּמְאָה. תָּנָא: מִפְּנֵי אֹהֶל הַטּוּמְאָה. פְּשִׁיטָא, ״מִפְּנֵי הַטּוּמְאָה״ תְּנַן!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches that **Rabbi Shimon says:** One cuts **all** branches of **the tree** that extend into the public domain **along the plumb line, due to ritual impurity.** The Gemara explains: A *tanna* **taught** in a *baraita* that this is **due to ritual impurity** imparted in **a tent.** Branches over a corpse might create a tent, thereby transferring impurity to whatever is beneath the branches, rendering impure those passing under the tree in the public domain. The Gemara expresses surprise at this statement: It is **obvious** that this is the reason. **We** already **learned** that it is **due to ritual impurity.** How else could ritual impurity be transferred through branches other than by means of a tent?


###### Bava Batra 27b:23
[Bava Batra 27b:23](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/27b:23)

אִי מִמַּתְנִיתִין, הֲוָה אָמֵינָא: דִּלְמָא מַיְיתֵי עוֹרֵב טוּמְאָה וְשָׁדֵי הָתָם, וְסַגְיָא בְּדַחְלוּלִי בְּעָלְמָא; קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן:

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **If** this is learned **from the mishna** alone, **I would say** that the concern is that **perhaps a crow might bring** a source of **impurity** and perch on the tree’s branches **and throw it there. And** if that were the only concern, **a mere scarecrow [*bedaḥlulei*] would be sufficient** to frighten the crows away and prevent that type of impurity. Therefore, the *tanna* of the *baraita* **teaches us** that the concern is due to impurity imparted in a tent.


###### Bava Batra 27b:24
[Bava Batra 27b:24](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/27b:24)

**הַדְרָן עֲלָךְ לָא יַחְפּוֹר**