## Bava Kamma Daf 8b

###### Bava Kamma 8b:1
[Bava Kamma 8b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/8b:1)

בְּנִזָּקִין נָמֵי נֵימָא הָכִי!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
then **also with regard to damages, let** the buyer **say this** to the injured party. He could threaten to return the bill of sale of the inferior-quality land to the debtor, which would force the injured party to collect directly from the debtor’s inferior-quality land. Since the buyer can do so, he can effectively force the injured party to collect from the purchased intermediate-quality land instead of fulfilling his right to collect from superior-quality land. Yet, the *baraita* teaches that in this case each party collects from the land that was originally liened to him, which means that damages are collected from the superior-quality land, indicating that this threat would not be effective.


###### Bava Kamma 8b:2
[Bava Kamma 8b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/8b:2)

אֶלָּא הָכָא בְּמַאי עָסְקִינַן – בְּיַתְמֵי, דְּלָאו בְּנֵי פֵרָעוֹן נִינְהוּ, וְשִׁיעְבּוּדָא דִּילֵיהּ עֲלֵיהּ דִּידֵיהּ רַמְיָא;

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, with what are we dealing here?** We are dealing **with** a case in which the debtor died and his inheritors are his **orphans, who are not subject to** an obligation to **repay** the debts of their father. When one dies, his monetary debts are not inherited by his children. **And** therefore, **the lien of** the creditor **rests** solely **upon the buyer** of the land. Any lien that was in effect with regard to the land he owned at the time he incurred the obligation remains, and his creditors can therefore collect what they are owed from that land, even if it is in the possession of a buyer.


###### Bava Kamma 8b:3
[Bava Kamma 8b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/8b:3)

הִלְכָּךְ לֵיכָּא לְמֵימַר הָכִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Therefore, one cannot say** that the ruling in the *baraita* is based on the fact that the buyer can threaten to return the bill of sale to the debtor, or in this case, to his orphans. In this case, even if he were to return the bill of sale, the creditors would not be able to collect from the land now in the orphans’ possession, as they received it anew, not as an inheritance from their father. Therefore, the creditors can still collect from the plots of land that remain with the buyer.


###### Bava Kamma 8b:4
[Bava Kamma 8b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/8b:4)

אֶלָּא מִשּׁוּם דְּאָמַר לְהוּ: טַעְמָא מַאי אֲמוּר רַבָּנַן אֵין נִפְרָעִין מִנְּכָסִין מְשׁוּעְבָּדִים בְּמָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ בְּנֵי חוֹרִין – מִשּׁוּם תַּקַּנְתָּא דִּידִי; אֲנָא בְּהָא תַּקַּנְתָּא לָא נִיחָא לִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests another explanation of the *Tosefta*: **Rather,** not all the creditors collect from the superior-quality land, which was the last plot of land purchased from the debtor, **because** the buyer **can say to them: What is the reason** that **the Sages said one is not paid from liened** property, i.e., property liened to a creditor that has been sold by the debtor, **whenever there is unsold** property still in the debtor’s possession? It is **due to an ordinance** created solely **for my** benefit, as I should not be expected to pay from the land I purchased when the debtor is still able to pay. If that ordinance were to be in effect in this case, all of their liens would be in effect with regard to the superior-quality land, as that was purchased last. In this case **I do not** find **this ordinance satisfactory to me,** and I would prefer for the lien of each creditor to remain in effect with regard to the land it had been on initially, and I will give each of you that land.


###### Bava Kamma 8b:5
[Bava Kamma 8b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/8b:5)

כִּדְרָבָא – דְּאָמַר רָבָא: כׇּל הָאוֹמֵר אִי אֶפְשִׁי בְּתַקָּנַת חֲכָמִים כְּגוֹן זוֹ – שׁוֹמְעִין לוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara notes: This fact that one is not required to avail himself of the financial benefit provided by a rabbinic ordinance **is in accordance with** the opinion **of Rava. As Rava says: Anyone who says: I do not want** to avail myself **of** the financial benefit provided by **an ordinance of the Sages, such as this** one, **one listens to him.**


###### Bava Kamma 8b:6
[Bava Kamma 8b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/8b:6)

מַאי ״כְּגוֹן זוֹ״?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What** does Rava mean by saying: An ordinance of the Sages, **such as this** one?


###### Bava Kamma 8b:7
[Bava Kamma 8b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/8b:7)

כִּדְרַב הוּנָא – דְּאָמַר רַב הוּנָא, יְכוֹלָה אִשָּׁה שֶׁתֹּאמַר לְבַעְלָהּ: אֵינִי נִיזּוֹנֶית, וְאֵינִי עוֹשָׂה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: His statement is **in accordance with** the opinion **of Rav Huna. As Rav Huna says:** The Sages enacted that a husband must sustain his wife. They also enacted that he receives her earnings in exchange. Yet, **a wife is** legally **entitled to say to her husband: I will not be sustained** by you, **and** in turn **I will not work** i.e., you will not keep my earnings. Since his obligation to sustain her is only for her benefit, she may forgo her sustenance and retain her earnings for herself.


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

פְּשִׁיטָא, מָכַר לוֹקֵחַ בֵּינוֹנִית וְזִיבּוּרִית, וְשִׁיֵּיר עִידִּית לְפָנָיו – לֵיתוֹ כּוּלְּהוּ וְלִיגְבּוֹ מֵעִידִּית;

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara discusses a limitation on the buyer’s ability to refuse the benefit of the rabbinic ordinance: **It is obvious** that if the **buyer sold,** of the land he purchased from the debtor, the **intermediate- and inferior-quality** land to another buyer **and retained in his possession** only the **superior-quality** land, which he had purchased last, **then all** the creditors **may come and collect from** the **superior-quality** land.


###### Bava Kamma 8b:9
[Bava Kamma 8b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/8b:9)

דְּהָא אַחֲרוֹנָה הִיא, וּבֵינוֹנִית וְזִיבּוּרִית לֵיתַנְהוּ גַּבֵּיהּ דְּמָצֵי לְמֵימַר לְהוּ: גְּבוֹ מִבֵּינוֹנִית וְזִיבּוּרִית, דְּלָא נִיחָא לִי בְּתַקַּנְתָּא דְּרַבָּנַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**For** if the intermediate-quality and inferior quality land were in his possession, **he would be able to say to** the creditors: **Collect from** the **intermediate-quality** land and from the **inferior-quality** land, as **it is not satisfactory to me** to avail myself of the **ordinance of the Sages**. Now that he has sold the land of intermediate and inferior quality, however, he cannot unilaterally waive the ordinance without the consent of the second buyer. The second buyer benefits from the ordinance, since it compels the creditors to collect from the first buyer, and he will therefore certainly not agree to waive it.


###### Bava Kamma 8b:10
[Bava Kamma 8b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/8b:10)

אֲבָל מָכַר עִידִּית, וְשִׁיֵּיר בֵּינוֹנִית וְזִיבּוּרִית, מַאי?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**But if** the first buyer **sold** only the **superior-quality** land that he had purchased last, **and** he **retained** in his possession the **intermediate-quality and inferior-quality** land, **what** is the *halakha*?


###### Bava Kamma 8b:11
[Bava Kamma 8b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/8b:11)

סְבַר אַבָּיֵי לְמֵימַר: אָתוּ כּוּלְּהוּ גָּבוּ מֵעִידִּית.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye thought to say: All** the creditors **should come** and **collect from** the **superior-quality** land. Since that land was the last plot of land in the debtor’s possession, the creditors’ right of collection was restricted to that land, irrespective of the fact that it was then subsequently sold twice.


###### Bava Kamma 8b:12
[Bava Kamma 8b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/8b:12)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רָבָא: מָה מָכַר רִאשׁוֹן לַשֵּׁנִי – כׇּל זְכוּת שֶׁתָּבֹא לְיָדוֹ; וְכֵיוָן דְּאִילּוּ אָתוּ גַּבֵּי לוֹקֵחַ רִאשׁוֹן – מָצֵי (אַגְבֵּי לְהוּ) [לְאַגְבּוֹיִינְהוּ] מִבֵּינוֹנִית וְזִיבּוּרִית, וְאַף עַל פִּי דְּכִי זַבְנִי[נְהוּ לְ]בֵינוֹנִית וְזִיבּוּרִית אַכַּתִּי עִידִּית (בְּנֵי) [בַּת] חוֹרִין הֲוַאי – וְאֵין נִפְרָעִין מִנְּכָסִים מְשׁוּעְבָּדִים כׇּל זְמַן דְּאִיכָּא בְּנֵי חוֹרִין; מָצֵי אָמַר לְהוּ: לָא נִיחָא לִי בְּהַאי תַּקָּנָה;

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said to him: What has the first** person **sold to the second** in any sale? **Any rights that will come into his possession. And since, if** the creditors **were to come to** the **first buyer** while he was still in possession of all three plots of land, **he could have had them collect from** the **intermediate-quality and inferior-quality** land; **and** this is the *halakha* **even though when he** initially **purchased** the **intermediate-quality and inferior-quality** land the **superior-quality** land **was** still **unsold** property in the debtor’s possession. As although there is the rabbinic ordinance that **one does not exact payment from liened property when there is unsold** property still in the debtor’s possession, the buyer **could have said to them: I do not** find **this ordinance satisfactory to me.**


###### Bava Kamma 8b:13
[Bava Kamma 8b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/8b:13)

לוֹקֵחַ שֵׁנִי נָמֵי, מָצֵי אָמַר לְהוּ: גְּבֵי בֵּינוֹנִית וְזִיבּוּרִית. דְּכִי זָבֵין לוֹקֵחַ שֵׁנִי, אַדַּעְתָּא דְּכֹל זְכוּתָא דַּהֲוָה לֵיהּ לְרִאשׁוֹן בְּגַוַּהּ זָבֵין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rava continues: Therefore, since the first buyer had the right to say this, the **second buyer can also say to them: Collect** from the **intermediate-quality and inferior-quality** land in the first buyer’s possession. **As, when the second buyer purchased** the superior-quality land, **he purchased** it **with the understanding that he** also acquired **all the rights that the first** buyer **had with regard to** that land. Accordingly, he also acquires the right to insist that the creditors collect from the intermediate-quality and inferior-quality land.


###### Bava Kamma 8b:14
[Bava Kamma 8b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/8b:14)

אָמַר רָבָא: רְאוּבֵן שֶׁמָּכַר כׇּל שְׂדוֹתָיו לְשִׁמְעוֹן, וְהָלַךְ שִׁמְעוֹן וּמָכַר שָׂדֶה אַחַת לְלֵוִי, וּבָא בַּעַל חוֹב דִּרְאוּבֵן; רָצָה – מִזֶּה גּוֹבֶה, רָצָה – מִזֶּה גּוֹבֶה. וְלָא אֲמַרַן אֶלָּא דִּזְבַן בֵּינוֹנִית,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
In a related ruling, **Rava says:** In the case of **Reuven, who sold all of his fields to Shimon** simultaneously **and Shimon proceeded to sell one field** of those purchased **to Levi, and Reuven’s creditor came** to collect the debt, if the creditor so **desires, he collects from this** one, i.e., Shimon, and if **he** so **desires, he collects from that** one, i.e., Levi. **And we said this only** in a case **where** Levi **purchased intermediate-quality** land from Shimon. A creditor’s right is to collect the debt from intermediate-quality land. Accordingly, in this case, Reuven’s creditor can collect his loan from the intermediate-quality land even after it has been transferred into Levi’s possession. Nevertheless, if he so desires, he may insist on collecting his loan from any inferior-quality land left in Shimon’s possession. This is because a creditor also has the right to demand payment from a borrower’s inferior-quality land instead of his intermediate-quality land, and therefore that land is also liened to the loan.


###### Bava Kamma 8b:15
[Bava Kamma 8b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/8b:15)

אֲבָל זְבַן עִידִּית וְזִיבּוּרִית – לָא, דַּאֲמַר לֵיהּ: לְהָכִי דְּיַיקִי וּזְבַנִי עִידִּית וְזִיבּוּרִית, אַרְעָא דְּלָא חַזְיָא לָךְ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**But** if Levi **purchased superior-quality and inferior-quality** land from Shimon, **no,** the creditor can collect only from Shimon’s intermediate-quality land, **as** Levi could **say to him: For this** reason **I was particular to purchase superior-quality and inferior-quality** land, which is **land that is not fit for you** to collect from as a creditor.


###### Bava Kamma 8b:16
[Bava Kamma 8b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/8b:16)

וַאֲפִילּוּ זְבַן בֵּינוֹנִית נָמֵי, לָא אֲמַרַן אֶלָּא דְּלָא שַׁיַּיר בֵּינוֹנִית דִּכְווֹתַיהּ, דְּלָא מָצֵי אָמַר לֵיהּ: הִנַּחְתִּי לְךָ מָקוֹם לְגַבֵּי שִׁמְעוֹן. אֲבָל שַׁיַּיר בֵּינוֹנִית דִּכְווֹתַיהּ גַּבֵּי שִׁמְעוֹן – לָא גָּבֵי מִינֵּיהּ, דְּמָצֵי אָמַר לֵיהּ: הִנַּחְתִּי לְךָ מָקוֹם לִגְבּוֹת מִמֶּנּוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if** Levi **purchased** the **intermediate-quality** land from Shimon **as well, we said** that Reuven’s creditor can collect from him **only** in a case **where he did not leave** some **similar intermediate-quality** land in Shimon’s possession, **as** in that case, Levi **is unable to say to** the creditor: **I left a place for you,** i.e., a plot of land, **in Shimon’s possession,** from which to collect. **But** where Levi **did leave** some **similar intermediate-quality** land **in Shimon’s possession,** the creditor **does not collect from** Levi, **as** Levi **is able to say to him: I left a place for you from which to collect.**


###### Bava Kamma 8b:17
[Bava Kamma 8b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/8b:17)

אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: רְאוּבֵן שֶׁמָּכַר שָׂדֶה לְשִׁמְעוֹן בְּאַחְרָיוּת, וַאֲתָא בַּעַל חוֹב דִּרְאוּבֵן וּטְרַף מִשִּׁמְעוֹן, דִּינָא הוּא דְּאָזֵיל רְאוּבֵן וּמִשְׁתַּעֵי דִּינָא בַּהֲדֵיהּ; וְלָא מָצֵי אָמַר לֵיהּ: לָאו בַּעַל דְּבָרִים דִּידִי אַתְּ, דְּאָמַר לֵיהּ: אִי מַפְּקַתְּ מִינֵּיהּ – עֲלַי הָדַר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
In another related ruling, **Abaye says:** In the case of **Reuven, who sold a field** liened to his creditor **to Shimon with a guarantee,** meaning that Reuven agreed to reimburse Shimon should Reuven’s creditor collect the debt from that field, **and Reuven’s creditor came and seized** the field **from Shimon, the *halakha* is that Reuven** can **go and litigate with** his creditor and claim that he had already repaid the debt, and insist that the field be returned to Shimon. **And** the creditor **is unable to say to** Reuven: **I am not legally answerable to you,** as I am not taking away your land, since you sold it to Shimon. This is **because** Reuven could **say to him: If you extract** the field **from him,** Shimon **will return to me** and demand that I reimburse him for his loss. Consequently, I am involved in this matter.


###### Bava Kamma 8b:18
[Bava Kamma 8b:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/8b:18)

וְאִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי: אֲפִילּוּ שֶׁלֹּא בְּאַחְרָיוּת נָמֵי, דְּאָמַר לֵיהּ: לָא נִיחָא לִי דְּתֶהְוֵי לְשִׁמְעוֹן תַּרְעוֹמֶת עֲלַי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And there are** those **who say: Even** in a case **where** he sold the field **without a guarantee, as well,** in which case even if the creditor seizes Shimon’s land there are no legal consequences for Reuven, Reuven can litigate with the creditor, **as** he could **say to him: It is not satisfactory for me for Shimon to have a grievance against me** because he lost the field I sold him on account of the fact that I was unable to pay my debt. Consequently, I am involved in this matter.


###### Bava Kamma 8b:19
[Bava Kamma 8b:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/8b:19)

וְאָמַר אַבָּיֵי: רְאוּבֵן שֶׁמָּכַר שָׂדֶה לְשִׁמְעוֹן שֶׁלֹּא בְּאַחְרָיוּת,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** in another related ruling, **Abaye says:** In the case of **Reuven, who sold a field to Shimon without a guarantee,**