Kiddushin, Daf Mem Bet, Part 4

 

Introduction

The Talmud continues to deal with sayings by R. Nahman concerning division of property

 

אמר רב נחמן האחין שחלקו הרי הן כלקוחות פחות משתות נקנה מקח יתר על שתות בטל מקח שתות קנה ומחזיר אונאה

 

R. Nahman said: When brothers divide, they are reckoned as purchasers from each other: [for an error of] less than a sixth, the transaction is valid; exceeding a sixth, it is void; [exactly] one sixth, it is valid, but he returns the amount of error.

 

R. Nahman says that the rules concerning over and undercharging that apply to purchasers also apply to brothers dividing up their father s property.

 

אמר רבא הא דאמרן פחות משתות נקנה מקח לא אמרן אלא דלא שויה שליח אבל שויה שליח אמר לתקוני שדרתיך ולא לעוותי

 

Rava said: That which we said, that [for an error of] less than a sixth the transaction is valid, that is only if one did not appoint an agent; but if he appointed an agent, he can say, I sent you to benefit me, not to injure me.

 

Rava now places several limitations of R. Nahman s ruling. If the error was less than one-sixth, but was made by an agent appointed by one of the brothers, the brother can nullify the sale because the agent has not done his job.

 

והא דאמרן יתר משתות בטל מקח לא אמרן אלא דלא אמר ניפליגן בשומא דבי דינא אבל אמר נפלוג בשומא דבי דינא מכרן קיים דתנן שום הדיינים שפיחתו שתות או הותירו שתות מכרן בטל רשב"ג אומר מכרן קיים

 

And that which we said, exceeding a sixth, the transaction is void , that is only if one did not say: We will divide according to the court s evaluation ; but if he said We will divide according to the court s evaluation, the transaction is valid. For we learned: If the judges valuation was at one sixth too little or at one sixth too much, their sale is void. R. Shimon b. Gamaliel said: Their sale is valid.

 

If the brother s explicitly stipulate that they will divide the property according to the court s evaluation, then the rule follows Rabban Shimon b. Gamaliel who said that the court s evaluation stands even if it errs by more than a sixth.

והא דאמרן שתות קנה ומחזיר אונאה לא אמרן אלא במטלטלי אבל במקרקעי אין אונאה לקרקעות

 

And that which you said: One-sixth, it is valid, but he returns the amount of error, that was said only of movables, but as for real estate, the law of overcharging does not apply to real estate.

 

The law of overcharging does not apply to real estate, only to movable property.

 

ובמקרקעי לא אמרן אלא דפלוג בעילויא אבל פלוג במשחתא לא כדרבה דאמר רבה כל דבר שבמדה ושבמשקל ושבמנין אפילו פחות מכדי אונאה נמי חוזר

 

When it comes to real estate, this was said only if the division was by evaluation, but not if the division was made by measure, in accordance with Rabbah, who said, Everything which [in which an error was made] in measure, weight or number, even if less than the standard of overcharging, is returnable.

 

If the error with land was not an error of evaluation but of measure, the division of the land can be returned. When we said that there is no rule of overcharging with land, that was when the issue was over or undervalued land, not land that was improperly measured.