Mishnah
Mishnah

Reference for Kiddushin 1:6

כָּל הַנַּעֲשֶׂה דָמִים בְּאַחֵר, כֵּיוָן שֶׁזָּכָה זֶה, נִתְחַיֵּב זֶה בַחֲלִיפָיו. כֵּיצַד. הֶחֱלִיף שׁוֹר בְּפָרָה אוֹ חֲמוֹר בְּשׁוֹר, כֵּיוָן שֶׁזָּכָה זֶה, נִתְחַיֵּב זֶה בַחֲלִיפָיו. רְשׁוּת הַגָּבוֹהַּ, בְּכֶסֶף, וּרְשׁוּת הַהֶדְיוֹט, בַּחֲזָקָה. אֲמִירָתוֹ לַגָּבוֹהַּ, כִּמְסִירָתוֹ לַהֶדְיוֹט:

Everything which is made money for something else [The gemara explains: Everything which is assessed as money for something else; everything which, if it is to be given as money for something else, must be assessed — that is, all chattel (metaltelin), aside from currency] — once the one appropriates it, the other is responsible for its exchange. [That is, once one of them pulls it (as an act of acquisition), the other is responsible for its exchange if it were lost or died, wherever it (what was thereby acquired) may be, even though he (the buyer) did not pull it. For by the seller's pulling the scarf or a (different) object, the purchased object is acquired by the buyer wherever it may be, even though the object whereby it is acquired is not worth a p'rutah, so long as it not be a coin or fruits, these not effecting such acquisition. And all things are acquired by (such) exchange (chalifin) — metaltelin, bondsmen, and land — with the exception of currency, which is not acquired by chalifin, one's mind-set being on the figure (impressed) in the currency and not on the substance itself; and the figure is susceptible of effacement. Therefore, if one took currency without weight or count and said: "This is chalifin for that field, or bondsman, or object," once the other (the seller) pulls it, he (the buyer) is responsible for its exchange. For the fact that it was not weighed or counted makes it manifest that there was no mind-set on the (imprinted) figure. And no means avails for the acquisition of currency which is not immediately at hand except agav, (acquisition of the currency) together with land.] How so? If an ox were exchanged for an ass, or an ass for an ox, once the first appropriates (either animal), the other is responsible for its exchange. The domain of the Temple (acquires with) money, and the domain of the laity, with chazakah. [If the Temple treasurer gives money for a beast, even (if the beast were) "in the end of the world," he acquires it; but the laity acquire only with chazakah, i.e., pulling. And if a lay person gave money for something, so long as he did not pull it, he does not acquire it, and the seller must return the money if he (the buyer) backs out, and he (the one who backs out) comes under (an imprecation, viz.:) "He who punished (…will punish him who does not keep his word.") But if the buyer pulled the object, even if he did not yet pay the stipulated amount, neither can back out. And if he neither gave the money nor pulled the object, but only reached an agreement with the seller to buy at a certain price — even if he said: "You are my witnesses," there is nothing (binding) in this, and he does not even come under an imprecation (if he backs out)]. One's "saying" to the Temple is like one's "giving" to the laity. [If one says: "This ox is a burnt-offering; this house is consecrated" — even if it were "in the end of the world," the Temple acquires it. But with the laity, there is no acquisition until he (the buyer) pulls the animal or performs an act of chazakah in the house.]

Jastrow

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jastrow

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jastrow

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jastrow

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jastrow

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Previous VerseFull ChapterNext Verse