## Bava Batra Daf 62a

###### Bava Batra 62a:1
[Bava Batra 62a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/62a:1)

וְאִי אֲמַר לֵיה:ּ ״נִכְסֵי״ – אֲפִילּוּ בָּתֵּי וְעַבְדֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if he said to him:** I am selling you my **property,** it means that he is selling him **even** his **houses and** his Canaanite **slaves.**


###### Bava Batra 62a:2
[Bava Batra 62a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/62a:2)

מָצַר לוֹ מֶצֶר אֶחָד אָרוֹךְ וּמֶצֶר אֶחָד קָצָר – אָמַר רַב: לֹא קָנָה אֶלָּא כְּנֶגֶד הַקָּצָר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara continues its examination of the concept of delineating boundaries in a wide manner, and considers the following case: If in the bill of sale the seller **delineated one boundary line** on one side of the field **long, and the other boundary line** on the opposite side of the field he delineated **short, Rav said:** The buyer **acquires only** a width of land **corresponding to the short** border, as it is assumed that the short boundary line delineates the actual size of the field that was sold to him, while the long boundary line was merely intended to point to the field under discussion. That is to say, the seller delineated the boundaries in a broad manner, but did not intend to include everything found within those boundaries in the sale.


###### Bava Batra 62a:3
[Bava Batra 62a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/62a:3)

אֲמַרוּ לֵיהּ רַב כָּהֲנָא וְרַב אַסִּי לְרַב: וְיִקְנֶה כְּנֶגֶד רֹאשׁ תּוֹר! שְׁתֵיק רַב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Kahana and Rav Asi said to Rav: But let him** also **acquire the triangular plot [*rosh tor*]** bounded by the diagonal line connecting the end of the short border and the end of the long border. **Rav was silent** and did not respond.


###### Bava Batra 62a:4
[Bava Batra 62a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/62a:4)

וּמוֹדֶה רַב, הֵיכָא דְּאִיכָּא מֶצֶר רְאוּבֵן וְשִׁמְעוֹן מֵחַד גִּיסָא, וּמֶצֶר לֵוִי וִיהוּדָה מֵחַד גִּיסָא; מִדַּהֲוָה לֵיהּ לְמִכְתַּב לֵיהּ דִּרְאוּבֵן כְּנֶגֶד לֵוִי וּדְשִׁמְעוֹן כְּנֶגֶד יְהוּדָה, וְלָא כְּתַב לֵיהּ; שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ כְּנֶגֶד רֹאשׁ תּוֹר הוּא דַּאֲמַר לֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Rav concedes** that **where there is a boundary line** defined by the fields **of Reuven and Shimon on one side** of the field being sold, **and a boundary line** defined by the fields **of Levi and Yehuda on the other side,** and in the bill of sale the seller describes the field being sold as bordered by the fields of Reuven and Shimon on one side but mentions only the field of Levi on the other side, **since** had he intended to sell only half the field **he should have written for** the buyer in the bill of sale that the field is bordered by the field **of Reuven** on the one side, which is **opposite** that **of Levi** on the other, **or** by the field **of Shimon** on the one side, which is **opposite** that **of Yehuda** on the other, **but he did not write** that **for him,** one can **conclude from it that he is telling him** that he is selling him not only the area between the fields of Reuven and Levi, but also **the triangular plot** bounded by the diagonal line connecting the end of Shimon’s field to the end of Levi’s field.


###### Bava Batra 62a:5
[Bava Batra 62a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/62a:5)

מֶצֶר רְאוּבֵן מִזְרָח וּמַעֲרָב, וּמֶצֶר שִׁמְעוֹן צָפוֹן וְדָרוֹם – צְרִיךְ לְמִכְתַּב לֵיהּ: ״מֶצֶר רְאוּבֵן רוּחִין תְּרֵין, וּמֶצֶר שִׁמְעוֹן רוּחִין תְּרֵין״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara continues: If the field being sold is **bounded by** the fields of **Reuven** on **the east and the west, and** it is **bounded by** the fields of **Shimon** on **the north and the south,** it is not enough to designate the field for the buyer as the field between the fields of Reuven and Shimon, but **it is necessary to write for him** in the bill of sale that the field is **bounded by** the fields of **Reuven** on **two sides, and** it is **bounded by** the fields of **Shimon** on **two sides.** Otherwise, all that the buyer acquires is a triangular plot bounded by one of Reuven’s fields and one of Shimon’s fields, and the boundary is the diagonal line connecting the end of Reuven’s field to the end of Shimon’s field.


###### Bava Batra 62a:6
[Bava Batra 62a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/62a:6)

אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: סִיֵּים לוֹ אֶת הַקְּרָנוֹת, מַהוּ? כְּמִין גַּאם, מַהוּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**A dilemma was raised before** the Sages: **If** the seller **defined for** the buyer only **the corners** of the field being sold, **what is** the *halakha*? Does this mean that he is selling him only the corners of the field or the entire field marked by those corners? A second dilemma was also raised: If he defined the boundaries of the field in a shape **resembling** the Greek letter **gamma [*gam*],** or the English letter L, noting the boundaries on two adjacent sides that meet at a right angle, **what is** the *halakha*? Does this mean that he is selling him the entire field, or only the triangular plot marked by those boundaries and the diagonal line running from the end of one to the end of the other?