Commentary for Bava Batra 3:2
שָׁלֹשׁ אֲרָצוֹת לַחֲזָקָה, יְהוּדָה וְעֵבֶר הַיַּרְדֵּן וְהַגָּלִיל. הָיָה בִיהוּדָה וְהֶחֱזִיק בַּגָּלִיל, בַּגָּלִיל וְהֶחֱזִיק בִּיהוּדָה, אֵינָהּ חֲזָקָה, עַד שֶׁיְּהֵא עִמּוֹ בַמְּדִינָה. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה, לֹא אָמְרוּ שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים אֶלָּא כְדֵי שֶׁיְּהֵא בְאַסְפַּמְיָא, וְיַחֲזִיק שָׁנָה, וְיֵלְכוּ וְיוֹדִיעוּהוּ שָׁנָה, וְיָבֹא לְשָׁנָה אַחֶרֶת:
There are three lands for chazakah: Judah, Trans-Jordan, and the Galil. [Three lands in Eretz Yisrael are separate from each other vis-à-vis chazakah, so that if one held one of these lands and the owner were in a different land, his chazakah is no chazakah, for caravans are not frequent from one to the other. And even a time which is not one of danger or war is regarded as such a time relative to them, (i.e., It is assumed that) if the owner protested, no one could apprise the holder of the land thereof. Therefore, the holder of the land should have held on to his bill(of purchase), and since he failed to do so, the loss is his.] If he (the owner) were in Judah and he (the other) held (land) in the Galil — if he were in the Galil, and he held in Judah, it is not a chazakah; but he must be with him in the same land, [e.g., both in Judah or both in Trans-Jordan, even if one were in one city, and one in another. For caravans being frequent, he should have protested; and since he did not protest, he is the loser.] R. Yehudah said: They posited three years only, in consideration of: one year for his (the owner's) being in Spain, and his (the other's) holding it, one year for their (messengers') going and apprising him (the owner), and the next year for his (the owner's) coming (and protesting). [R. Yehudah holds that the rationale for chazakah is not that one guards a bill (of purchase) for three years but not longer. For a man does not allow his land to be eaten even for one hour without protesting. Rather, the reason three years were posited is that if the owner were in Spain, etc. But if he (the owner) were with him (the holder) in the same city, then it is a chazakah immediately. And in these three lands between which caravans are not frequent, three years are a chazakah. The halachah is not in accordance with R. Yehudah.]
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Batra
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Batra
Rabbi Judah said: “They have specified a period of three years so that if the owner was in Spain and another took possession [of his property] during one year, they could make it known to the owner during the next year and he could return in the third year.”
Our mishnah divides the land of Israel into three distinct parts. As we shall see, this division is important for the rules of chazakah, which we began to learn in mishnah one of this chapter.
If a person took possession of a field and another came within three years and protested that the field was his, the original owner would retain title to the property. Our mishnah deals with a situation where the original owner lived in a different region from his field and therefore he may not have known that another had taken possession of the field, in order to protest within the allotted three years. According to the opinion in section one, in such a case there is no demonstration of ownership through possession for three years. If the owner was in a different region, for instance in the Galilee and the field was in Judea, we cannot assume that the reason he didn’t protest for three years is that he didn’t own the field. Since he may not have heard there can be no ownership through possession. According to Rabbi Judah, the reason that the Rabbis allotted three years in order to establish ownership by possession is to allow messengers to travel up to a year’s distance, there and back, in order to alert the original owner that another had taken his fields. In other words, according to Rabbi Judah, three years time is meant to give the person a chance to protest on another’s possession of his property. If he doesn’t do so, we do not assume that he didn’t hear. Rather, we assume that he sold or gave away his property to the current possessor and therefore does not protest.