{"id":3982,"date":"2017-02-26T09:12:41","date_gmt":"2017-02-26T07:12:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.dafyomi4women.org\/daf\/?p=3982"},"modified":"2017-02-26T09:12:41","modified_gmt":"2017-02-26T07:12:41","slug":"bava-batra-34b-35","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.dafyomi4women.org\/daf\/2017\/02\/bava-batra-34b-35\/","title":{"rendered":"Bava Batra 34b-35"},"content":{"rendered":"

Two people claimed ownership over a boat, the law of “may the stronger one prevail” kicks in. \u00a0If one of them asks the court to seize the property to prevent that law from kicking in to buy time in which he\/she\u00a0can find evidence to support his\/her claim, can they? \u00a0And if the court does seize it, can they release it in the event that no further proof is found. \u00a0If two claim ownership to land but neither can prove it, Rav Nachman says: “the stronger one prevails.” \u00a0There are many interpretations explaining the logic behind this law (which seems more like anarchy than a law). \u00a0The gemara then compares it to various other cases of doubtful situations where either the law is that it gets split 50\/50 or the judges can decide which side gets the item in question. \u00a0The gemara now reverts back to the first mishna regarding how long it takes for one to have a chazaka on the land. \u00a0It brings an example where one can have a chazaka<\/em> immediately. \u00a0Rav Zevid limits this case and his explanation is questioned by Rav Ashi. \u00a0In the end it seems clear that if one had a sharecropper or sold one rights to the fruits of the property, one must make sure that before three years pass, one must state a protest or explain that the person has rights only to the fruits. \u00a0Otherwise, the other can claim ownership. \u00a0The same is true for land used for collateral where the fruits the lender eats are used to pay back the loan (mashkanta d’sura)<\/p>\n

\n