## Kiddushin Daf 27a

###### Kiddushin 27a:1
[Kiddushin 27a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/27a:1)

נָתוּן לוֹ לִיהוֹשֻׁעַ, וּמְקוֹמוֹ מוּשְׂכָּר לוֹ. וְעִישּׂוּר אַחֵר שֶׁאֲנִי עָתִיד לָמוֹד נָתוּן לוֹ לַעֲקִיבָא בֶּן יוֹסֵף, כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּזְכֶּה בּוֹ לַעֲנִיִּים, וּמְקוֹמוֹ מוּשְׂכָּר לוֹ. שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ בָּעֵינַן צְבוּרִים בַּהּ! שָׁאנֵי הָתָם, כִּי הֵיכִי דְּלָא לַיטְרְחִינְהוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**is given** as first tithe **to Yehoshua** ben Ḥananya, who was a Levite, **and the place** of the tithe **is rented to him** so that he can acquire the tithe by means of the land. **And another tenth that I will measure out in the future** as the poor man’s tithe **is given to Akiva ben Yosef so that he will acquire it on behalf of the poor, and its place is rented to him.** One can **learn from here** that **we require** the movable property to be **piled on** the land, as Rabban Gamliel emphasized: Its place. The Gemara rejects this argument: **It is different there,** as Rabban Gamliel did this **so as not to trouble** the Sages to whom he was giving the tithes by forcing them to transport the tithes to a different location. For reasons of convenience he transferred to the other Sages ownership of the land where the tithes were already situated.


###### Kiddushin 27a:2
[Kiddushin 27a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/27a:2)

תָּא שְׁמַע, דְּאָמַר רָבָא בַּר יִצְחָק אָמַר רַב: שְׁנֵי שְׁטָרוֹת הֵן: ״זְכוּ בְּשָׂדֶה זוֹ לִפְלוֹנִי וְכִתְבוּ לוֹ אֶת הַשְּׁטָר״ – חוֹזֵר בַּשְּׁטָר, וְאֵינוֹ חוֹזֵר בַּשָּׂדֶה. ״עַל מְנָת שֶׁתִּכְתְּבוּ לוֹ אֶת הַשְּׁטָר״ – חוֹזֵר בֵּין בַּשְּׁטָר בֵּין בַּשָּׂדֶה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara further suggests: **Come** and **hear** a solution for this dilemma, **as Rava bar Yitzḥak says** that **Rav says: There are two** types of **documents.** If one says: **Acquire this field for so-and-so and write the document for him** as proof of the sale of the field, **he can retract** his agreement **with regard to the document.** He can change his mind and tell them not to write the document. **But he cannot retract** his agreement **with regard to the field,** as the buyer has already acquired it. By contrast, if he said: Acquire this field for so-and-so **on the condition that you write him a document,** if the document has not yet been given **he can retract** his agreement **both with regard to the document and with regard to the field,** as he transfers the field to him only on the condition that he writes a document.


###### Kiddushin 27a:3
[Kiddushin 27a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/27a:3)

וְרַב חִיָּיא בַּר אָבִין אָמַר רַב הוּנָא: שְׁלֹשָׁה שְׁטָרוֹת הֵן. תְּרֵי – הָא דַּאֲמַרַן, אִידַּךְ: אִם קָדַם מוֹכֵר וְכָתַב לוֹ אֶת הַשְּׁטָר, כְּאוֹתָהּ שֶׁשָּׁנִינוּ: כּוֹתְבִים שְׁטָר לַמּוֹכֵר אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין לוֹקֵחַ עִמּוֹ. כֵּיוָן שֶׁהֶחְזִיק עִמּוֹ בַּקַּרְקַע – נִקְנָה שְׁטָר בְּכׇל מָקוֹם שֶׁהוּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Rav Ḥiyya bar Avin said** that **Rav Huna** said: **There are** actually **three** types of **documents. Two** types are **those that we said,** and **the other** type is as follows. **If the seller first wrote him the document,** as a seller can write a bill of sale before the transaction and give it when he receives payment. This is **as we learned** in a mishna (*Bava Batra* 167b): A scribe may **write a deed** of sale **for the seller** of property who requests one, **even if the purchaser is not with him** when he presents his request. In a case of this kind, **once** the buyer **takes possession of the land from him, the document is acquired** by the buyer **wherever it is,** i.e., even if it is not in the possession of the buyer.


###### Kiddushin 27a:4
[Kiddushin 27a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/27a:4)

שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ לָא בָּעֵינַן צְבוּרִים בַּהּ! שָׁאנֵי שְׁטָר דְּאַפְסֵירָא דְאַרְעָא הוּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
One can **learn from** here that **we do not require** that the property be **piled on it,** as in this case the document is acquired by means of the land wherever the document is located. The Gemara rejects this proof: **A document is different, as it is the bridle of the land.** Since the document that refers to the land is the means by which one takes possession of the land, it is considered as though the document is part of the land. Therefore, one can take possession of the document by means of the land without it actually having to be placed there. The same does not necessarily apply to other movable property, which does not refer specifically to the land.


###### Kiddushin 27a:5
[Kiddushin 27a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/27a:5)

וְהָא עֲלַהּ קָתָנֵי: זוֹ הִיא שֶׁשָּׁנִינוּ: נְכָסִים שֶׁאֵין לָהֶם אַחְרָיוּת נִקְנִין עִם נְכָסִים שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהֶם אַחְרָיוּת בְּכֶסֶף בִּשְׁטָר וּבַחֲזָקָה! שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ: לָא בָּעֵינַן צְבוּרִים בָּהּ, שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But it was taught concerning this** *halakha* that a document can effect acquisition wherever it is located: **This is what we learned** in the mishna: **Property that does not serve as a guarantee can be acquired** along **with property that serves as a guarantee by** means of giving **money, by** means of giving **a document, or by** means of taking **possession** of them. This indicates that there is no difference between a document and other types of movable property. Consequently, one can **learn from** here that **we do not require** that the property be **piled on** the land. The Gemara affirms: One can **learn from** here that this is the case.


###### Kiddushin 27a:6
[Kiddushin 27a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/27a:6)

אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: מִי בָּעֵינַן ״אַגַּב״ אוֹ לָא? תָּא שְׁמַע, דְּקָתָנֵי כֹּל הָנֵי, וְלָא קָתָנֵי אַגַּב. וּלְטַעְמָיךְ, ״קְנִי״ מִי קָתָנֵי?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**A dilemma was raised before** the Sages: **Do we require** that one who sells movable property **by means of** land state explicitly that this is his intention, **or not?** The Gemara suggests: **Come** and **hear, as** those aforementioned *baraitot* **teach all these** *halakhot* of acquiring movable property through land, **and** they **do not teach** the expression: **By means of.** This indicates that it is not necessary to specify this aspect of the acquisition. The Gemara rejects this proof: **And according to your reasoning, is it taught** that he must say to him: **Acquire** it? The *baraitot* do not state this, and yet everyone agrees that the seller must say to him that he should acquire the land.


###### Kiddushin 27a:7
[Kiddushin 27a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/27a:7)

אֶלָּא, עַד דְּאָמַר ״קְנִי״? הָכָא נָמֵי, עַד דַּאֲמַר ״אַגַּב״. וְהִלְכְתָא: צְבוּרִים – לָא בָּעֵינַן, ״אַגַּב״ וּ״קְנִי״ – בָּעֵינַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** one must say that the acquisition is not effective **unless he says: Acquire** it, and yet the *tanna* did not deem it necessary to mention this requirement. **Here too,** the acquisition is not effective **unless he says: By means of.** This requirement is not mentioned because these *baraitot* do not discuss the type of statements he must issue, but simply are referring to the basic legal issues involved. The Gemara concludes: **And the *halakha*** is that **we do not require** that the property be **piled** on the land, but **we require** that the seller say that he is transferring the movable property **by means of** the land, **and** he must say: **Acquire** it.


###### Kiddushin 27a:8
[Kiddushin 27a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/27a:8)

אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: שָׂדֶה בְּמֶכֶר וּמְטַלְטְלִין בְּמַתָּנָה מַהוּ? תָּא שְׁמַע: עִישּׂוּר שֶׁאֲנִי עָתִיד לָמוֹד, נָתוּן לִיהוֹשֻׁעַ וּמְקוֹמוֹ מוּשְׂכָּר לוֹ, שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **A dilemma was raised before** the Sages: If a seller wishes to give **a field in** the form of **a sale and** with it **movable property as a gift, what is** the *halakha*? Can he transfer them together by means of a transaction performed with the land? The Gemara suggests: **Come** and **hear** a proof for this dilemma from the incident involving Rabban Gamliel, as he said: **One-tenth** of produce **that I will measure out in the future is given to Yehoshua, and its place is rented to him. Learn from this** that even if the field is rented, which is equivalent to a sale, and the tithe is given as a gift, one can transfer the two together.


###### Kiddushin 27a:9
[Kiddushin 27a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/27a:9)

אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: שָׂדֶה לְאֶחָד, וּמְטַלְטְלִין לְאַחֵר מַהוּ? תָּא שְׁמַע: עִישּׂוּר שֶׁאֲנִי עָתִיד לָמוֹד נָתוּן לַעֲקִיבָא בֶּן יוֹסֵף כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּזְכֶּה בּוֹ לַעֲנִיִּים וּמְקוֹמוֹ מוּשְׂכָּר לוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Another **dilemma was raised before** the Sages: If one wishes to give **a field to one** person **and movable property to another, what is** the *halakha*? Can one transfer movable property to one person by means of land that is going to be gifted to another? The Gemara suggests: **Come** and **hear** that which Rabban Gamliel stated: **One-tenth** of **that** which **I will measure out in the future is given to Akiva ben Yosef so that he will acquire it on behalf of the poor, and its place is rented to him.** Although the gift is for the poor and the place is rented to Rabbi Akiva, the acquisition is effective.


###### Kiddushin 27a:10
[Kiddushin 27a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/27a:10)

מַאי ״מוּשְׂכָּר״ – מוּשְׂכָּר לְמַעֲשֵׂר. וְאִי בָּעֵית אֵימָא: שָׁאנֵי רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, דְּיַד עֲנִיִּים הֲוָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this proof: **What** is the meaning of: **Rented,** in this case? It means **rented for tithe.** This land was not rented to Rabbi Akiva for his own use, but only so that he could receive the tithe. Therefore, the land was also given to the poor. **And if you wish, say** a different refutation: **Rabbi Akiva is different,** as he was a charity collector, and therefore **he was** considered **like the hand of the poor.** Since a charity collector collects charity on behalf of the poor, he has the status of the poor himself. If so, this cannot be compared to a case in which one transfers a certain item to one person and land to someone else.


###### Kiddushin 27a:11
[Kiddushin 27a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/27a:11)

אָמַר רָבָא: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא שֶׁנָּתַן דְּמֵי כוּלָּן, אֲבָל לֹא נָתַן דְּמֵי כוּלָּן – לֹא קָנָה אֶלָּא כְּנֶגֶד מְעוֹתָיו.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Rava says:** The Sages **taught** that one can acquire movable property by way of land **only when he gives all the money** for the land and the movable property. **But** if **he did not give the money** for **all** the property, even if they were transferred to him **he acquires only** the movable property **corresponding to the money** that he paid.


###### Kiddushin 27a:12
[Kiddushin 27a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/27a:12)

תַּנְיָא כְּווֹתֵיהּ דְּרָבָא: יָפֶה כֹּחַ הַכֶּסֶף מִכֹּחַ הַשְּׁטָר, וְכֹחַ הַשְּׁטָר מִכֹּחַ הַכֶּסֶף. יָפֶה כֹּחַ הַכֶּסֶף – שֶׁהַכֶּסֶף פּוֹדִין בּוֹ הֶקְדֵּשׁוֹת וּמַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי, מַה שֶּׁאֵין כֵּן בִּשְׁטָר. וְיָפֶה כֹּחַ הַשְּׁטָר – שֶׁהַשְּׁטָר מוֹצִיא בְּבַת יִשְׂרָאֵל, מַה שֶּׁאֵין כֵּן בְּכֶסֶף.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**It is taught** in a *baraita* (*Tosefta*, *Ketubot* 2:3) **in accordance with** the opinion **of Rava: The power of money is greater than the power of a document** in one way, **and the power of a document** is greater **than the power of money** in a different way. The *baraita* elaborates: **The power of money is greater** in **that money** can be used to **redeem consecrated property and second tithe, which is not** the case **with a document. And the power of a document is greater** than the power of money, **as a document releases a Jewish woman,** i.e., a man can divorce his wife with a bill of divorce, **which is not** the case **with money.**


###### Kiddushin 27a:13
[Kiddushin 27a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/27a:13)

וְיָפֶה כֹּחַ שְׁנֵיהֶם מִכֹּחַ חֲזָקָה, וְכֹחַ חֲזָקָה מִכֹּחַ שְׁנֵיהֶם. יָפֶה כֹּחַ שְׁנֵיהֶם – שֶׁשְּׁנֵיהֶם קוֹנִים בְּעֶבֶד עִבְרִי, מַה שֶּׁאֵין כֵּן בַּחֲזָקָה. יָפֶה כֹּחַ חֲזָקָה – שֶׁחֲזָקָה מָכַר לוֹ עֶשֶׂר שָׂדוֹת בְּעֶשֶׂר מְדִינוֹת, כֵּיוָן שֶׁהֶחְזִיק בְּאַחַת מֵהֶם – קְנָאָם כּוּלָּם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues: **And** furthermore, **the power of each,** money and a document, as a means to transfer ownership **is greater than** the power of acquisition by means of **taking possession, and the power of taking possession is greater than** the power of acquisition of **each of them.** How so? The **power of each of them is greater** than the power of acquisition of taking possession, **as each of them effects acquisition** in the case **of a Hebrew slave, which is not** the case **for taking possession** (see 14b). **The power of taking possession is greater** than the power of acquisition of each of them, **as** with regard to **taking possession,** if one **sold** another **ten fields in ten countries, once** the buyer **takes possession of one of** the fields **he acquires all of them.**