Rambam - 1 Chapter a Day

The Maggid Mishneh mentions a debate among the Rabbis whether the word “earth” is significant or not. There are authorities who maintain that the word “earth” implies that the land must be fit to sow. Others maintain that it is not that significant. The Tur and the Ramah (Choshen Mishpat 218:1) cite the latter view.

A kor is 30 se’ah. A portion of land 50 cubits by 50 cubits (2500 square cubits) is required to sow a se’ah. Thus, the portion of land required to sow a kor is 75000 square cubits.

As reflected in the laws of separate domains on the Sabbath, a pit ten handbreadths deep or a mound ten handbreadths high is considered a distinct entity. We borrow that principle from its ritual context and apply it to the acquisition of property (Maggid Mishneh). On this basis, we must also assume that the hollows or the rocks must be at least four handbreadths wide [Ramah (loc. cit.)].

And thus, crops could be grown within them.

I.e., when measuring the land, there must be 75000 square cubits without counting these hollows and rocks.

If the hollows are large enough to sow a quarter of a kav of grain, they are considered to be a significant, independent entity and are not included in the sale of the field as a whole.
The Tur and the Ramah (loc. cit.) differ with the Rambam and maintain that the hollows and the rocks remain the property of the seller.

Even if they are filled with water [Ramah (Choshen Mishpat 218:2)].

This is one forty-fifth of the entire field. Any larger portion is considered too great a loss for the purchaser to forfeit.

In his Kessef Mishneh, Rav Yosef Karo raises the possibility that the proper version of the text is ten kabbim. In his Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 218:2), however, he states “five.”

If they are closer together than that, they are considered to be a single stone the size of the entire area (Sefer Me’irat Einayim 218:9). The rationale is that if they were so concentrated, crops could not easily be sown and harvested in an area with so many rocks.

I.e., this area where the rocks are concentrated is itself spread out over the majority of the field and not contracted in a minor portion. Thus, it will not prevent a portion of the field from being used.
Implied is that the rocks must be concentrated in one area, but not so tightly concentrated that the space between the rocks cannot be used; dispersed throughout the field, but not so widely dispersed so as to create an impression that rocks are everywhere.

The field as a whole is considered too rocky.

The dispersion of the rocks makes the field as a whole difficult to use.

The tight concentration of the rocks prevents this entire area from being used.

They must, however, be at least three handbreadths high or deep to disqualify the field [Tur, Ramah (Choshen Mishpat 218:2)]. Any obstruction less than three handbreadths high is considered to be an ordinary part of the field, because of the principle of l’vud.

The standard text of the Mishneh Torah [and the Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 218:3)) understands these to be two separate clauses connected by the Hebrew word או, meaning “or.” The Maggid Mishneh maintains that this is a printing error, and instead a vav connects the two. Thus, they are one description - i.e., there is one long line of rocks.

See diagram a. The rocks are in the center of the field, but their ends project from the corners (Maggid Mishneh).
Diagram A
The protrusions from the star represent the ends of the rocks that project outward.

Our translation is based on the diagram that accompanies the standard text of the Maggid Mishneh. (See diagram b.) Seler Me’irat Einayim 218:18 maintains that the interpretation is “on the diagonals of the field” and gives the following diagram (diagram c).
Diagram B
The Conception of the Maggid Mishneh
Diagram C

In these instances, it is difficult to plow in between the rocks, and there is thus a doubt whether the sale is effective.

Hence, if the purchaser has not yet paid for the land, the seller cannot expropriate the money for these portions of land from him. If he has already paid, he is required to accept the land from the seller [Tur (Choshen Mishpat 218)].

In such a situation, it is possible to sow the field because there is a certain measure of earth above the rocks. Nevertheless, the roots of the plants cannot penetrate deeply, and thus certain crops will not grow well (Sefer Me’irat Einayim 218:20).

In which case, it is possible - albeit with difficulty - to clear the rocks from the field (ibid.:21).

The previous halachah spoke about an area of small rocks, with none of them being of significant size. When, however, a rock is of the size mentioned in this halachah, it is considered to be a distinct entity and is not counted within the measure of the field.

Since it is on the border of the field, and it cannot be used to sow grain, we begin the measurement of the field from it and not from the border.

Because the portion of earth between the rock and the border can be sown.
The Rambam’s rulings are quoted verbatim by the Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 218:5). The Ramah states that the Tur has a different conception of these matters.

Implied is that the parcel of land is the same size as one in which a kor can be sown, but that a kor cannot be sown within it, because of rocks, hollows or other factors.

The Ramah and the Tur (Choshen Mishpat 218:6) differ and maintain that if the stones cover an area larger than that which is necessary to sow four kabbim, this leniency does not apply.
According to this view [which is based on the interpretation of the Rashbam (Bava Batra 102b)], the only leniency that results from the use of this expression is that if the stones are ten handbreadths or more high, they are not considered to be separate entities, but are measured together with the field.

This term implies that the measurement must be precise.

See Chapter 15, which describes the laws governing an error in measurement.

See the Maggid Mishneh and Sefer Me’irat Einayim 218:28, which state that these laws apply only when the person names a specific field, is standing in the field under consideration when the sale is made, or when the seller says: “I am selling you this parcel of earth fit to sow a kor.”

The area fit to sow a fourth of a kav is considered significant. In each se’ah, there are six kabbim. Thus, one twenty-fourth of the area fit to sow a se’ah of grain is considered a significant measure.

I.e., the purchaser or the seller would be willing to sacrifice such an amount.

I.e., The restitution must include not only the amount more than a fourth of a kav for each [parcel of earth fit to sow a se’ah], but also that amount itself. Since restitution is necessary, it must include the entire amount needed to match the measure quoted at the outset.
The Ramah (Choshen Mishpat 218:8) adds two points:
a) If the field is much less than the land necessary to sow a kor to the extent that it would never be described in that manner, the sale is nullified. It is not sufficient to make up the difference financially.
b) If the field is smaller and the seller has additional land, he should give the purchaser land and not money.

The question is: When the seller gave a greater amount of land than necessary, should land be returned to him or money?

Any field smaller than this figure is not considered to be of significant size to be called a field. Because the field is so small, the seller is given the option of receiving payment for it.

I.e., the seller is given the option of receiving money or taking his land back. If the price of the land increased in the interim, however, the purchaser is not required to pay the seller the additional amount.

Even if the additional amount is less than [an area fit to sow] nine kabbim.

The Maggid Mishneh asks why it is necessary to have an area fit to sow nine kabbim in addition to the fourth [of-a-kav parcels]. Seemingly, if the land to be returned to the seller is fit to sow nine kabbim, it is of sufficient size to be considered a field. Of what difference is it that this land is made up of the fourth [of-a-kav parcels]?
The Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 218:10) quotes the Rambam’s rulings. The Ramah (ibid.:12) cites the opinion of the Maggid Mishneh that an area fit to sow nine kabbim alone is sufficient. [Significantly, from his Commentary on the Mishnah (Bava Batra 7:2), it would appear that the Rambam does not require that this parcel contain the extra land.]

In this instance, in contrast to the first clause, the seller is not obligated to make this purchase.

I.e., the proper version is ;ipt11:i, and not ;ivw:i, as stated in the standard printed texts of the Mishneh Torah.

I.e., even if the price of land rose.

I.e., that the fluctuation in price is considered to the advantage of the purchaser, and he is required to pay only the price at the time of the sale.

The purchaser is not given the advantage of purchasing the extra parcel of land at its present market value. Instead, he must give the advantage to the seller, as the Rambam continues to explain.

The Tur and the Ramah (Choshen Mishpat 218:12) differ and do not require the purchaser to pay more than the present value of the land.

I.e., return the extra parcel of land to him. The seller must accept the land despite its decrease in value.

A garden is always smaller than a field. Hence, the minimum amount of land necessary for a plot to be considered a garden is also less.

As explained in Halachah 7.

As explained in the previous halachah.

Bava Batra 104b explains that originally there was no water on the land, and suddenly a flowing stream was discovered.

A stream that had been located there dried out (ibid.).

I.e., our Sages did not resolve the question.

The Rambam does not state what is done to resolve the question. The Maggid Mishneh states that the purchaser is not required to pay for the additional amount, but may return the land. We follow the principle: “When a person desires to expropriate money from a colleague, the burden of proof is upon him.” In this instance, since the seller cannot prove that the purchaser is obligated to pay him for the additional land, the purchaser is not under obligation. Sefer Me’irat Einayim 218:39 rules in a similar fashion.

This expression implies an exact measurement, as stated in Halachah 5.

This expression implies an approximation, as stated in Halachah 6.

I.e., it is not significant which of these statements he makes first.

Since the seller is in possession of the land, he has the upper hand. The purchaser receives the smallest amount of land that either of the expressions imply. Should the land be less than that necessary to sow a kor, the purchaser must accept it, and if it is more than what is necessary to sow a kor, he receives only the amount necessary to sow a kor.
The Ra’avad differs and explains that if the purchaser has paid the money, the laws stated by the Rambam apply. But if the purchaser has not paid the money yet, the seller is judged at a disadvantage. Should the land be less than that necessary to sow a kor, the seller must make up the difference, and if it is more than what is necessary to sow a kor, it is granted to the purchaser (Maggid Mishneh).

The borders with which the seller defined the property being sold are at least a sixth more or less than the area fit to sow a kor. We assume that either the seller or the purchaser was willing to forgo any difference up to one sixth.

The Maggid Mishneh notes that the Rambam does not specify whether compensation must be made for the entire extra amount, or only that portion beyond one sixth. The Tur and Sefer Me’irat Einayim 318:45 state that compensation must be made for the entire extra amount, as in Halachah 6.

The Maggid Mishneh emphasizes that the Rambam is not citing a particular ratio here. The intent is that regardless of the discrepancy between the seller’s description of the field and its actual size, since the purchaser is familiar with it, he is assumed to have accepted it. See Sefer Me’irat Einayim 218:47.

Sefer Me’irat Einayim 218:48 quotes the Tur and the Rashbam, who maintain that the field must be actually far more productive than an ordinary field its size.

I.e., a specifically designated parcel of land. If he does not designate a specific parcel of land, the seller is required to give the purchaser enough land to sow an entire kor (Ketzot HaChoshen 218:1).

A smaller measure of land, for a letech is half a kor.

The Song of Songs 4:13 associates an orchard with pomegranates.

See the conclusion of Chapters 26 and 27.