Bava Metzia 100: Negotiating and/or Dividing Disputed Profits

We begin and end daf 100 with New Mishnayot.  The first Mishna teaches us about the questionable ownership of the child of a cow or a maidservant when that cow or person gives birth before the exchange.  Further, questions arise when two slaves or two fields of different sizes are exchanged, particularly when one of the people is unsure about the size of the field that was agreed upon.  Generally speaking, the Mishna states that a person who is unsure about the size of their exchange should receive the smaller one, and that when both are uncertain, they divide the disputed amount.  The same goes for the value of a disputed offspring - its value is split between the two possible 'owners'.  

The Gemara wonders about different cases where a found offspring, whose ownership is also disputed, is cared for.  The rabbis also consider the differences between a certain claim and an uncertain claim.   The remainder of amud (a) is devoted to questions about a person received payment for a large slave when he received a small slave, or one who received payment for a large field when he received a small field.  But could this be referring to an argument about the slaves' garments and not the slaves themselves?

We learn about the dispute between our rabbis regarding comparisons between slaves and land.  Can oaths be taken both about slaves and with regard to land?  Can we truly compare arguments regarding one to arguments regarding another? Interesting to me is that the birth of a human 'slave' and the birth of an animal are certainly considered to be similar enough to compare and contrast halachot.  Should an oath be required?  Or should an object be divided between two claimants?

The Gemara concludes with Sumaukhos's words: when Torah law requires an oath, the disputed property is not divided.  

Our second Mishna teaches that one might sell his olive trees so that they will be cut down and used for wood or for oil.  If the olives grow before the trees are chopped down, who should benefit from them?  The Mishna teaches that if both owners argue that they should benefit from the olives - one because he paid for them and one because his care yielded the soil that yielded the olives, then their sale should be divided. If only a small amount of oil will be produced, then the new owner benefits from the olives.  Olives are divided if they are uprooted due to a storm and re-rooted in someone else's field where they produce olives.

The beginning of the Gemara questions the particular details involved in the sale of a number of olive trees.  The ownership of different amounts of oil could be negotiated by the buyer and the seller prior to such questions arising.  The Gemara notes that people are generally not particular about receiving less that he value of a quarter-log or more of oil per se'a of olives.  If the trees yield more than that, people are more particular about receiving a share of those profits.