דהאי ארעא דידי היא ואת לא זבינתה מינאי זיל לאו בעל דברים דידי את אמר רבא דינא קאמר ליה

that this land is formerly mine, and that you did not purchase it from me? Go away; I am not legally answerable to you. Rava said: The claimant stated the halakha to the possessor, as this is a legitimate claim, and Rava accepted his claim.

ההוא דאמר ליה לחבריה מאי בעית בהאי ארעא אמר ליה מפלניא זבינא ואכלתיה שני חזקה אמר ליה פלניא גזלנא הוא

There was a certain person who said to another: What do you want with this land of mine? The possessor said to him: I purchased it from so-and-so and then I worked and profited from it for the years necessary for establishing the presumption of ownership. The claimant said to him: So -and-so is a robber who robbed me of the field, and he did not have the authority to sell it to you.

אמר ליה והא אית לי סהדי דאתאי אימלכי בך ואמרת לי זיל זבין אמר ליה השני נוח לי הראשון קשה הימנו אמר רבא דינא קאמר ליה

The possessor said to him: But I have witnesses that I came and consulted with you, and you said to me: Go purchase the land, indicating that you conceded that he had the authority to sell it. The claimant said to him: The reason that I advised you to purchase it was because the second person, i. e., you, the possessor, is amenable to me, while the first, i. e., the purported thief, is more difficult than he, i. e., I prefer to litigate with you rather than with him. Rava said: The claimant stated the halakha to the possessor, as this is a legitimate claim, and Rava accepted his claim.

כמאן כאדמון דתנן העורר על השדה וחתום עליה בעד אדמון אומר השני נוח לי הראשון קשה הימנו וחכמים אומרים איבד את זכותו

The Gemara asks: In accordance with whose opinion is Rava’s statement? Is it in accordance with the opinion of Admon? As we learned in a mishna ( Ketubot 109a): With regard to one who contests ownership of a field, claiming that a field possessed by someone else actually belongs to him, and the claimant himself is signed as a witness on the bill of sale of the field to that other person, Admon says: His signature does not disprove his claim of ownership of the property, as it is possible that the claimant said to him self: The second person is amenable to me to deal with, as I can reason with him, while the first owner, who sold the field to the current possessor, is more difficult to deal with than he. And the Rabbis say: He lost his right to contest, as he signed a bill of sale that states that the field belongs to the possessor. Rava’s ruling appears to be in accordance with the individual opinion of Admon, and not with the opinion of the Rabbis.

אפילו תימא רבנן התם עבד ליה מעשה אבל הכא דבורא עביד איניש דמיקרי ואמר

The Gemara explains: You may even say that Rava’s ruling is in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis. There, in the case of the mishna in tractate Ketubot , by signing the bill of sale the claimant performed an action indicating that the field was not his for the benefit of the possessor of the field, but here, in Rava’s case, there was no action, only speech, and a person is apt to casually say statements, and he does not lose his right by virtue of this.

ההוא דאמר ליה לחבריה מאי בעית בהאי ארעא אמר ליה מפלניא זבינתה ואכלתיה שני חזקה אמר ליה פלניא גזלנא הוא אמר ליה והא אית לי סהדי דאתית באורתא ואמרת לי זבנה ניהלי אמר ליה אמינא איזבון דינאי אמר רבא עביד איניש דזבין דיניה

There was a certain person who said to another: What do you want with this land of mine? The possessor said to him: I purchased it from so-and-so and then I worked and profited from it for the years necessary for establishing the presumption of ownership. The claimant said to him: So -and-so is a robber who robbed me of the field, and he did not have the authority to sell it to you. The possessor said to him: But I have witnesses that you came to me at night and you said to me: Sell it to me, indicating that it is not your land, as if it were yours, you would have demanded that I return it without your paying for it. The claimant said to him: I said to myself: Let me purchase the benefit of avoiding my litigation in order to reclaim my land. Rava said: A person is apt to pay money to purchase the benefit of avoiding his litigation.

ההוא דאמר ליה לחבריה מאי בעית בהאי ארעא אמר ליה מפלניא זבינא ואכלתיה שני חזקה אמר ליה והא נקיטנא שטרא דזבני ליה מיניה הא ארבעי שני

There was a certain person who said to another: What do you want with this land of mine? The possessor said to him: I purchased it from so-and-so and then I worked and profited from it for the years necessary for establishing the presumption of ownership, indicating that he possessed it for three years, as this is the minimum number of years required for establishing the presumption of ownership. The claimant said to him: But I am holding a document stating that I purchased it from that seller four years ago. Therefore, if it was sold to you three years ago, as you claim, he did not have the authority to sell it at that time.

אמר ליה מי סברת שני חזקה תלת שני קא אמינא שני חזקה טובא קא אמינא אמר רבא עבידי אינשי דקרו לשני טובא שני חזקה

The possessor said to him: Do you maintain that when I said: I profited from the land for the years necessary for establishing the presumption of ownership, that I was say ing I worked and profited from the land for precisely three years? What I actually was say ing was that I worked and profited from the land for many years and thereby established the presumption of ownership. Since my purchase predated yours, it was effective. Rava said: It is common for people to refer to many years as: Years necessary for establishing the presumption of ownership, and his claim is accepted.

והני מילי דאכלה שבע דקדים חזקה דהאי לשטרא דהך

The Gemara comments: And this matter applies only if he profited from the land for seven years, so that presumptive ownership of this possessor preceded the document of that claimant.