Bava Kamma 8: Debt and Payment: Must We Follow Halacha?

We just learned that a person might have only intermediate and inferior quality land.  We were also exploring whether superior quality land was superior compared with itself or compared with land around the world.  Today's daf begins with the argument that a person who has only intermediate and inferior quality land proves that the quality of land is compared with that of the world.  The argument: if one has only two types of land, why not call it superior and intermediate quality?  We are introduced to a counterargument: perhaps his/her superior quality land was sold, leaving the intermediate quality land objectively judged as intermediate.  The rabbis continue to consider this question and eventually determine that Ulla is correct: a creditor can collect from inferior land as is dictated by Torah law.

It seems that debts travel with a person's property, even when that property is sold.  If a debtor sells his land, the creditor can approach the buyer and demand payment.  The rabbis explain what is done when a person sells his land to three people simultaneously; what to do when a buyer cannot cover the debt of the seller; why it is not sufficient to return a bill of sale, etc.  This system assumes that all of a person's debts are known publicly.  

We learn that orphans are not obliged to pay their father's debts, unlike children who have mothers who are living.  We also learn that liened property cannot be used to pay debts, whether it has been sold or it is a gift.

An interesting turn: people are permitted to go against the recommendations of the Sages.  If a person wishes to allow creditors or women to collect what is owned to them from intermediate instead of inferior land, that is permitted.  That person can say, "I do not want to avail myself of the financial benefit provided by an ordinance of the Sages".  This is a significant statement; the rabbis rarely encourage people to go against their ordinances. In fact, much argument in the Talmud revolves around the maintenance of rabbinically-based halacha.  Why is there leniency around this particular issue?

The Gemara goes on to describe complex cases where people might complain about payment that has been collected in this less conventional way.  People buy land without full knowledge of the history of the seller or the land; people sell property without guarantees.  Ultimately, people have grievances against each other.  

Hopefully we will learn soon whether or not the rabbis conclude this argument by insisting on following their suggestions or not.