Bava Kamma 9: The Transfer of Ownership; Careful What You Say You'll Keep Safe

Amud (a) focuses on the transfer of land from one party to another.  What about claimants who appear after the land has already been inherited by two sons?  How should land be divided in different circumstances?  When can a person come forward as a claimant?  Who does the land belong to after an agreement has been reached but before money has been exchanged?

One process we learn about is walking the perimeter of the land.  This walk determines whether or not the land is as it was described.  Some rabbis assert that the walk itself is acceptance of the agreement. Others say that a bag of money must be exchanged at the end of the walk, which finalizes the sale of the land.  Interesting that the transfer of ownership is so often linked with a physical action.  The exchange of money could be a marker.  Or the trampling on land.  Or even to change the land in some way - to add to it - these actions symbolize a change in ownership when done in the proper time and place (of course walking around another person's land at any given time does not symbolize a transfer of ownership!).

The rabbi's conversation moves into payment above what something is worth.  They discuss enhancing mitzvot that involve money by paying more money.  One third on top of the basic cost for an item is agreed to be the preferred amount to give (and the rabbis do not decide whether this refers to one third according to the individual or one third according to the world).  A note teaches us that some rabbis believe that payment beyond what is expected and up to one third more will be repaid in the World-to-Come.  Even better, anything beyond one third will be repaid by HaShem in this lifetime.  Now that is encouragement to enhance a mitzvah!

A new Mishna teaches us that a person who agrees to guard something from damage is obligated to pay for that item if it is then damaged.  The rules are slightly different for consecrated items.  The Gemara immediately turns to exceptions: what if the person guarding is compromised (a minor, a woman, an 'imbecile')?  How can they be liable for those damages but not liable in other circumstance, like destruction based on fire?  How is damage to a pit or to an ox different from damage by fire?

The rabbis note that the typical manner of a covered pit is for the pit to become uncovered; the typical manner of a leashed ox is to find a way to release itself from the leash; the typical nature of an ember is to go out on its own.  It is only with the help of something or someone who fans the ember that the ember becomes a fire of its own.

Much of the beginning of Bava Kamma is concerned with the transfer of ownership.  Thankfully, what could be a very dry conversation becomes quite lively when questions like 'what is the nature of becoming?' are introduced.