Rambam - 3 Chapters a Day

Containers owned by a person can acquire articles on his behalf wherever he has permission to place them down. Once movable property enters this container, neither can retract; it is as if the article were lifted up or placed in his home.

Therefore, a person's containers cannot acquire articles on his behalf in the public domain or in a domain belonging to the seller unless the seller tells him, "Go, acquire the article with this container."

Similarly, if the purchaser first acquired the container and lifted it up, and afterwards placed it down in the domain of the seller and bought produce from him, once the produce is placed in this container, he acquires it. Since the seller derives satisfaction from selling the container, he does not object to the container being placed in his domain.

Just as containers belonging to the purchaser do not acquire articles for him when placed in the seller's domain, so too, containers belonging to the seller do not acquire articles for the purchaser even when they are within the purchaser's domain.

Mesirah may be used to acquire an article only in the public domain, or in a courtyard that is not owned by either the seller or the purchaser.

Meshichah may be used to acquire an article only in a corner off the public domain or in a courtyard that is owned jointly by the seller and the purchaser. Hagbahah may be used to acquire an article in any place.

The following rule applies when an article that could be acquired through meshichah is located in the public domain, and is drawn by the purchaser into his own domain or into a corner of the public domain. As soon as he removes a portion of the article from the public domain, he acquires it.

When there is a load of produce in the public domain and, after having established a price, the purchaser draws it into his own domain or into a corner of the public domain he acquires it, even if he has not measured it.

Similarly, if, while in the public domain, the purchaser measures produce that he purchases, he acquires it, item by item, for as he measures it, he is lifting it up.

If, by contrast, the seller measures the produce into containers belonging to the purchaser, the purchaser does not acquire it. For a purchaser's containers cannot acquire on his behalf in the public domain.

If the produce is located in a domain belonging to the purchaser, once the seller agrees to sell the produce, the purchaser acquires it, even if he does not measure it.

If the produce is located in a domain belonging to the seller, or in a domain belonging to a person to whom the seller has entrusted it, the purchaser does not acquire the produce until he lifts it up, or until he removes it from the seller's domain by renting its place, or the like, as we have explained.

The following rules apply when the produce is located in a corner of the public domain or in a domain belonging to both the seller and the purchaser—or even if it is in a domain belonging to the purchaser, but in containers belonging to the seller—and the seller agreed to sell the produce, and has begun to measure it into containers belong to the seller. If the seller tells the purchaser: "I will sell you a kor of produce for 30 sela," he can retract even at the last se'ah, because the produce is in his containers, and he has not completed the measurement. For the containers belonging to a seller do not acquire for a purchaser, even in the purchaser's domain.

If he told him: "I will sell you a kor of produce for 30 sela, i.e., each se'ah for a sela" the purchaser acquires each se'ah, one by one as it is measured. For since the seller mentioned the price for each individual se'ah, each of those units is a distinct entity. Whenever the seller lifts up a se'ah and pours it into the measure, the sale of this unit is concluded.

The rationale for this law is that the produce is not located in a domain belonging to the seller, nor is it in the public domain. If the produce was not held in the containers of the seller, the purchaser would acquire it once a price was agreed upon, since it is located in his domain even though it had not been measured, as has been explained in the previous halachah.

Similar rules apply when a person sells wine or oil to a colleague in a corner of the public domain or in a courtyard belonging to both the seller and the purchaser, or in a domain belonging to the purchaser, and the measure belongs to the broker. Before the measure is filled, the liquid remains the seller's. Once the measure is filled, the liquid becomes the purchaser's. Neither of them can retract.

Similar rules apply if produce is held in a corner of the public domain or in a courtyard belonging to both the seller and the purchaser, the measuring container does not belong to either of them, and the seller was measuring. Before the measure is filled, it remains in the possession of the seller. Once the measure is filled, however, it becomes the purchaser's.

The following rules apply when the measure belongs to either the purchaser or the seller, and it has marks indicating the halfway point, thirds, quarters and the like. Once the produce reaches one of those markings, that portion is acquired even though the entire measure has not been filled. For every marking is considered to be a measure in its own right. For the measure belongs to one of them, and he relies on its markings.

Maintain awareness of this significant general principle: When a person acquires movable property, he acquires it, if he establishes the price and afterwards lifts up the article. If first he lifts it up and puts it down, and then a price is established afterwards, he does not acquire it because he lifted it up at the outset. Instead, it is only when he lifts it up after a price is established, or performs meshichah on an object that is not ordinarily lifted up.

When an object that has a standard and known price is sold, and the purchaser lifts it up, he acquires it, even though he and the seller agree on the price only after he lifts it up. Similarly, with regard to other means through which movable property is acquired. The acquisition must be made after the price of the article is established, unless there is a standard price for the article, as has been explained.

For this reason, the following rules apply if a person draws donkey-drivers and the produce their beasts are carrying and porters bearing containers filled with produce into his home. If the produce is measured before a price is established - even if the purchaser is the one who measures - or they established the price and then the seller measures the produce, both the seller and purchaser are entitled to retract. Different rules apply if the purchaser unloaded the produce and brought it into his home. If a price was established and then the seller measured, neither can retract. For the seller had made a commitment to sell. If he measured before a price was established, both can retract, because he has not made a commitment to sell. This applies even if the purchaser measures.

The following rules apply if a person takes utensils from a craftsman in order to inspect them to see whether he will purchase them. If they have a fixed price, and they are destroyed by forces beyond his control while in his possession, he is responsible for their value. The rationale is that since they are of a fixed value, they are considered to have entered his domain at the time he lifted them up.

The above applies under two conditions: a) he lifts the utensil up with the intent of acquiring it in its entirety, and b) the article being sold would be appreciated by a purchaser.

When, however, the seller is repelled by an article and seeks - and indeed pursues - an opportunity to sell it, it remains in the domain of the seller until a price is established and the purchaser lifts it up afterwards.

All the above rules apply whether the purchaser himself performs meshichah on an object, lifts it up or manifests ownership over it, or tells another person to lift it up, perform meshichah or manifest ownership. The other person acquires for the purchaser. This also applies with regard to other acts of acquisition.

The exchange of any movable property brings about a binding transaction. What is implied? If a person exchanges a cow for a donkey, or wine for oil, once one performs meshichah or lifts up the article that he intends to acquire, the other person acquires the second form of movable property stipulated in the exchange, wherever it is located. It is considered to have entered his domain, even though he has not performed meshichah upon it.

The above applies although both parties to the transaction are particular about the price, have determined how much this article is worth and how much the other article is worth, and exchanged them after making that determination.

When a person exchanges a donkey for a cow and a lamb, if he performs meshichah on the cow but not on the lamb, the acquisition is not concluded, for he did not complete the meshichah. The same principle applies in all analogous situations.

When one is not precise about the amount of money involved in a transaction, the money is considered in the same way as other types of movable property, and its exchange brings about a binding transaction.

What is implied? A person scooped up coins without weighing them or counting them, but rather took an estimated amount, said: "Sell me your cow...," or "...this wine, for these coins," and gave him the coins, the transaction is completed; neither party may retract. Since this is an uncommon situation, our Sages did not require the purchaser to perform meshichah.

Similarly, movable property can be acquired without meshichah in the following situation. Reuven sold movable property to Shimon for 50 zuz. Shimon acquired the movable property and obligated himself to pay Reuven the price agreed upon. After Shimon became obligated to Reuven for these 50 zuz, he desired to sell wine, an animal, a servant or other similar movable property. Reuven told him: "Sell that object to me for the 50 zuz that you owe me for the sale," and Shimon agreed.

Reuven acquires the movable property regardless of where it is located, even though he neither performed meshichah nor lifted the object up. The rationale is that this also is an abnormal circumstance, and our Sages did not require meshichah.

When, by contrast, a person is in debt for reasons other than a sale, and his creditor tells him: "Sell me the movable property for the debt that you owe me," even though both agree, the transaction is not completed until he lifts up the object, performs meshichah on an object that is not usually lifted up, or acquires it through other means by which movable property can be acquired.

Landed property, servants, livestock and all other movable property can be acquired through the kinyan referred to as chalifin. This way of finalizing a transaction is so commonly used that it is also referred to as kinyan.

The fundamental manner in which such a transaction is effected is as follows: The purchaser gives the seller any type of article and tells him: "Acquire this article in exchange for the courtyard,..." "...wine,..." "...animal,..."or "...servant that you sold me in exchange for this and this amount of money."

Once this statement is made, when the seller lifts up the article and acquires it, the purchaser acquires that landed property or that movable property even though he did not perform meshichah or pay the money. Neither of the parties involved can retract.

Such a transaction may be completed only through the use of a utensil. A utensil is effective, however, even if it is not worth a p'rutah.

Such a transaction may not be completed using an article from which it is forbidden to benefit, nor with produce, nor with a coin.

Such a transaction may not be completed using an article belonging to the seller; only one belonging to the purchaser.

When a third party transfers a utensil to the seller so that the purchaser will acquire merchandise that was designated, the purchaser acquires it.

Even though he transfers the utensil to him with the intent that it be returned, the transaction is binding, and the purchaser acquires the merchandise intended. For a gift that is given with the stipulation that it be returned is nevertheless considered a gift.

Moreover, even if the seller does not take hold of the entire utensil that was transferred to him in exchange for his merchandise, but rather holds a portion of it, and the person transferring the utensil to him holds the other portion, the purchaser acquires the merchandise, provided [the seller] holds a portion of the utensil that can itself be considered to be a utensil, or grabs it in a manner in which he would be able to pull the entire utensil from the hands of the person transferring it into his own possession.

Therefore, if the person transferred a portion of a garment to a seller, the seller must hold a portion of the garment the size of three fingerbreadths. Thus, if he cuts off the portion that he is holding, it would be considered a utensil in its own right. For a portion of a garment the size of three fingerbreadths is considered a garment, as has been explained with regard to the subject of the ritual impurity of garments. Similarly, if the seller holds on to a portion smaller than three fingerbreadths but could pull the entire garment into his possession, the purchaser acquires the merchandise being sold.

The above concepts are reflected in the expression used in legal documents: "And we performed a kinyan with so and so with a utensil that is acceptable to be used to conduct a transaction."

"A utensil" excludes produce and the like. "That is acceptable" excludes objects from which it is forbidden to benefit. And "to be used to conduct a transaction" excludes a utensil belonging to the seller.

This transaction need not be performed in the presence of witnesses. Instead, even if it was performed only in the presence of the seller and the purchaser, the transaction is finalized. For the only reason the Torah required witnesses with regard to monetary laws is to prevent a person from denying what transpired.

A seller, one who gives a gift, rents out an object, lends an object or the like does not require witnesses. Whenever the second party finalizes the transaction through one of the accepted practices - lifting the article up, meshichah, transferring it, chalifin, the payment of money, the transfer of a legal document or through manifesting ownership - the transaction is concluded, even when there are no witnesses present.

Although a person who sells or gives an article confirms the transaction with a kinyan chalifin, both of them may retract as long as they are discussing the matter. This applies even when the kinyan was performed in the presence of witnesses. If they concluded discussing the matter, neither may retract even though the transaction was not observed by witnesses.

Just as the seller and the giver may retract, so too, the purchaser and the recipient may retract as long as they are discussing the matter. This leniency does not apply with regard to other kinyanim.

There are many matters that do not require a kinyan, and indeed there is no reason to perform a kinyan with regard to them - e.g., a person who frees his slave, divorces his wife, appoints an agent, issues a protest with regard to a sale, nullifies a protest or waives a colleague's obligation to pay a debt or return an entrusted object. Similar laws apply to other analogous situations.

It has become customary in the majority of places to perform a kinyan to confirm certain of the above matters and the like, even though it is not necessary. The witnesses say: "We performed a kinyan with so and so, confirming that he appointed so and so as an agent," "...waived the debt that so and so owed him," or "...nullified the protest he had issued concerning this bill of divorce," or the like.

Such a kinyan, which is customarily performed with regard to these matters, is of no consequence except to demonstrate that the parties involved were not acting facetiously or in jest when making the statements, but had in fact made a resolution in their hearts before making the statements. Therefore, if a person says: "I am making my statements with a full heart, and I have resolved to do this," nothing else is necessary.

A kinyan is of no consequence with regard to statements that are of no substance.

What is implied? If it is stated in a legal document: "We performed a kinyan with so and so, confirming that he will travel to sell merchandise with so and so," "...that they will form a craft partnership," "...that they will divide a field between themselves," or the like, this is considered a kinyan with regard to words, and it is of no consequence. The rationale is that the person did not transfer to his colleague a specific and known entity, neither the entity itself or the fruits of that known entity.

Although produce cannot be used for chalifin, as explained, it can be acquired through chalifin like other movable property. With regard to a coin, by contrast, just as it cannot be used for chalifin, it cannot be acquired through chalifin. Thus, a coin cannot be acquired through a kinyan chalifin, and it cannot be used for a kinyan chalifin to acquire other articles.

Slabs of gold and silver are regarded in the same way as pieces of raw iron or copper. They are like other movable property and can be acquired through chalifin and exchanged for each other, as has been explained.

Coins of silver, gold and brass are all considered to be money received as payment for other movable property. If one gives one of these as payment for movable property, one does not acquire it until one performs meshichah or lifts it up, as has been explained. None of these coins can be acquired through kinyan chalifin, or used for such a kinyan.

When does the above apply? When one is acquiring other movable property, servants or landed property with these coins. When, however, gold dinarim are being exchanged for silver coins, the gold coins are considered to be "produce." Similarly, copper coins are considered to be "produce" with regard to silver coins.

What is implied? If a person gave a colleague a dinar of gold for 25 dinarim of silver, the owner of the gold acquires the silver even though it has not yet been transferred into his domain. The owner of the silver is obligated to give his colleague 25 silver dinarim, as he committed himself. If he committed himself to give new silver coins, he must give new ones; if he committed himself to give old coins, he must give old ones.

If, however, the owner of the silver gave 25 silver dinarim for one gold dinar, the transaction is not concluded until he takes the gold dinar. Both parties have the right to retract.

Similarly, if a person gave a colleague 30 isar of copper for a dinar of silver, the owner of the copper acquires the silver even though it has not yet been transferred into his domain. The owner of the silver is obligated to give his colleague a silver dinar, as he committed himself. If he committed himself to give a new silver coin, he must give a new one; if he committed himself to give an old coin, he must give an old one.

If, however, the owner of the silver gave a silver dinar for 30 copper isar, the transaction is not concluded until he takes the copper isarot. Both parties have the right to retract.

Similarly, bad coins that were disqualified by the ruling kingdom or municipal authorities, or dinarim that are not acceptable as legal tender in that country - i.e., coins that are not used for exchange unless they are changed for others, these are considered to be produce with regard to all matters.

They may be acquired through a kinyan chalifin; when they are transferred, money is acquired; and the transfer of money does not acquire them, as is true with regard to other produce.

There is no way in which a person can acquire a coin that is not in his physical possession, except by virtue of his acquisition of landed property -e.g., a person will purchase land and by virtue of its acquisition also acquire coins, or he will rent the place where the coins are held. In these instances, once the purchaser acquires the land through the transfer of money, a legal document, manifestation of his ownership or a kinyan chalifin, he acquires the money.

The above applies provided that the coins exist and are held for safekeeping in a specific place. If, however, Shimon owed Reuven money, and Reuven transferred land to Levi, and intended that by virtue of Levi's acquisition of the land, he acquire the debt owed to Reuven by Shimon, it appears to me that Levi does not acquire the debt.

If three people the lender, the borrower and a third party (the intended recipient) are standing together and the lender tells the borrower, "Give the maneh that you owe me (whether an entrusted article or a loan) to so and so the third party," that third party acquires the maneh in question. None of the three can retract. Our Sages described this law as a dictate whose reason cannot be explained. Therefore, one cannot derive any other precept from it.

If Reuven owed Shimon 100 zuz and told Levi: "Give Shimon the 100 zuz that I owe him, and I will repay you," or "...I will make a reckoning with you"- although both Levi and Shimon agree, all three have the potential to retract.

Even if Levi pays Shimon a portion of Reuven's debt he is not bound to pay the remainder. Therefore, if Levi does not pay Shimon the entire debt, Shimon may demand payment for the remainder of the debt from Reuven.

When a person sells a promissory note to a colleague or gives one to him as a gift, the physical transfer of the note does not bring about a transfer of the obligation it carries. For he transferred only the proof of the debt. And that proof is not something that can be grasped by the hand.

How indeed can the promissory note be acquired? The seller must write to the purchaser: "Acquire the promissory note of so and so and all the obligations associated with it," and then give him the promissory note. Thus, the note is acquired through the writing and through being transferred.

There is no need for witnesses with regard to the actual transfer. Witnesses are necessary, however, for the debt to be collected. The debtor can tell the purchaser: "Who is to say that my creditor did in fact write to you that the debt is transferred and give you the promissory note?"

The transfer of the ownership of promissory notes is a Rabbinical institution. According to Scriptural law, there is no way to acquire the proof of an obligation; only an actual object can be acquired. Therefore, a person who sells a promissory note to a colleague can still waive the debt. Even his heir has the right to waive the debt.

When a woman brings her husband a promissory note as part of her dowry, she cannot waive payment of it without his approval, because her domain has become his.

When a person transfers ownership of even the smallest amount of property to a colleague and by virtue of its transfer also transfers the ownership of a promissory note, the purchaser acquires the note regardless of where it was located, although a written statement was not made and the document was not transferred to the purchaser. It appears to me that in this instance as well, the original creditor has the right to waive payment after selling it.

Similarly, if a person sells land and writes a deed of sale even though the purchaser is not present, when the purchaser manifests his possession over the land he acquires the deed regardless of where it is located.

The following rules apply if a person tells a colleague: "Take possession of this field on behalf of so and so, and compose a deed of title for him." Although the agent manifests ownership over the land on behalf of the recipient, the giver can retract his statement concerning the legal record of the present unless it has already been given to the recipient, despite the fact that he cannot rescind his gift of the field.

If, however, the giver told the agent: "Take possession of the field with the stipulation that you write the deed of title," even though the agent manifests ownership over the land on behalf of the recipient, the original owner can retract both with regard to the deed and with regard to the field until the deed of title reaches the hand of the recipient of the gift.