Tout ce qui est fait de l'argent pour autre chose [La gemara explique: Tout ce qui est évalué comme de l'argent pour autre chose; tout ce qui, pour être donné en argent pour autre chose, doit être évalué— c'est-à-dire tous les biens meubles (metaltelin), à part la monnaie] —une fois que l'un se l'approprie, l'autre est responsable de son échange. [Autrement dit, une fois que l'un d'eux le tire (comme un acte d'acquisition), l'autre est responsable de son échange s'il était perdu ou mort, où qu'il (ce qui a été ainsi acquis) puisse être, même s'il (l'acheteur) ne l'a pas tiré. Car en tirant le foulard ou un objet (différent) par le vendeur, l'objet acheté est acquis par l'acheteur où qu'il se trouve, même si l'objet par lequel il est acquis ne vaut pas une p'rutah, tant qu'il ne s'agit pas d'un pièces ou fruits, ceux-ci n'effectuant pas une telle acquisition. Et toutes choses sont acquises par (tel) échange (chalifin)— metaltelin, les esclaves et la terre —à l'exception de la monnaie, qui n'est pas acquise par le chalifin, l'état d'esprit étant sur le chiffre (imprimé) dans la monnaie et non sur la substance elle-même; et la figure est susceptible d'effacement. Par conséquent, si l'on prenait de la monnaie sans poids ni compte et disait: «C'est chalifin pour ce champ, ou esclave, ou objet», une fois que l'autre (le vendeur) la tire, il (l'acheteur) est responsable de son échange. Car le fait qu'il n'ait pas été pesé ou compté montre clairement qu'il n'y avait aucun état d'esprit sur la figure (imprimée). Et aucun moyen ne sert à l'acquisition de monnaie qui n'est pas immédiatement à portée de main sauf agav, (acquisition de la monnaie) avec la terre.] Comment cela? Si un bœuf était échangé contre un âne, ou un âne contre un bœuf, une fois que le premier s'approprie (l'un ou l'autre animal), l'autre est responsable de son échange. Le domaine du Temple (acquiert avec) l'argent, et le domaine des laïcs, avec la chazakah. [Si le trésorier du Temple donne de l'argent pour une bête, même (si la bête était) «à la fin du monde», il l'acquiert; mais les laïcs n'acquièrent qu'avec la chazakah, c'est-à-dire en tirant. Et si un profane a donné de l'argent pour quelque chose, tant qu'il ne l'a pas tiré, il ne l'acquiert pas, et le vendeur doit rendre l'argent s'il (l'acheteur) recule, et lui (celui qui recule) vient sous (une imprécation, à savoir. :) "Celui qui a puni (... punira celui qui ne tient pas sa parole.") Mais si l'acheteur a retiré l'objet, même s'il n'a pas encore payé le montant stipulé, il ne peut pas non plus revenir en dehors. Et s'il n'a ni donné l'argent ni retiré l'objet, mais seulement conclu un accord avec le vendeur pour acheter à un certain prix—même s'il a dit: «Vous êtes mes témoins», il n'y a rien (contraignant) là-dedans, et il ne relève même pas d'une imprécation (s'il recule)]. «Dire» au Temple est comme «donner» aux laïcs. [Si l'on dit: "Ce bœuf est un holocauste; cette maison est consacrée"—même si c'était «à la fin du monde», le Temple l'acquiert. Mais avec les laïcs, il n'y a pas d'acquisition jusqu'à ce qu'il (l'acheteur) tire l'animal ou accomplisse un acte de chazakah dans la maison.]
Bartenura on Mishnah Kiddushin
כל הנעשה דמים באחר – The Gemara explains (Kiddushin 28a-b): whatever is assessed as an equivalent (i.e., an exchange is meant and not a sale for cash), [for] anything – if one comes to give him money for another thing, must assess its value, that is, all the movables except for coins.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Kiddushin
Introduction
The first half of the mishnah discusses acquiring things through barter. The second half of the mishnah delves into the difference between the laws of acquisition for the Temple and those for an ordinary person.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Kiddushin
כיון שזכה זה – that is to say, once the first [person] pulls, the second is obligated for an exchange (I.e., a form of possession by handing to the purchaser an object as a symbolical substitute), in every place that they are, and if they died or lost it, and even though he had not pulled, since through the pulling by the seller of the scarf or the object, the object is acquired by the purchaser in whatever place he is in. And even though the object that they are purchasing is not worth at least a penny, and as long as it is not a coin or produce, with these – we do not acquire through them. And all things are acquired by exchange – movables, slaves and property, except for coinage which is not acquired through exchange, since the minds of people are [focused] on the form of the coin and not on its substance. For its form is likely to become nullified. Therefore, if a person purchased a coin without weight or without number, and said: “these are in exchange for a certain field,” or a certain slave, or a certain object, since this one pulled it, the other is liable in its exchange, for he has revealed his thought that he is not strict about its form since he didn’t weigh it or count it. For there is no way that the acquisition of the coin will take effect where it is lacking in his eyes, other than to acquire it along with land.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Kiddushin
Whatever can be used as payment for another object, as soon as this one takes possession [of the object], the other one assumes liability for what is given in exchange. How so? If one exchanges an ox for a cow, or a donkey for an ox, as soon as this one takes possession, the other one assumes liability for what is given in exchange. The general rule of acquiring things through exchange is illustrated simply in the example of the cow and ox. If Reuven and Shimon exchange an ox for a cow, when Reuven takes physical possession of Shimon’s cow, Shimon becomes owner of the ox, even if Shimon doesn’t take physical possession. The implication would be that if the ox dies or is stolen, Shimon is out of luck for it is his ox that died or was stolen. Alternatively, if the oxen market rises dramatically Shimon wins out. For better or for worse, in an exchange once one party takes possession of one of the objects being exchanged, the other party automatically owns the other object.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Kiddushin
רשות הגבוה בכסף – the treasurer who gave monies for the animal for the needs of the Temple treasury, even if it is at the end of the world, he has acquired it. But regarding a commoner who cannot acquire other than through claim based upon undisturbed possession, that is until he pulls it. And if the commoner gave money for the object, as long as he didn’t pull the object, he did not acquire it, and the seller can return the monies if he retracts from the sale of the object, and he accepts upon himself [the curse] of “he who punished” ( see Mishnah Bava Metzia, Chapter 4, Mishnah 2) (for not standing by his word). But if the purchaser pulled the object, even though he had not given the monies that he had stipulated, neither party of them can retract. And if he did not give the monies and did not pull the object, but rather, were pardoned on the sale in the presence of witnesses and he (i.e., the purchaser) was reconciled that her would purchase it for such-and-such an amount, and his fellow was reconciled to sell it for such-and-such an amount, even if he said: “you are my witnesses,” there is nothing in those words, and even [the curse] “he who punished” (for not standing by his word) is not here.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Kiddushin
The sanctuary’s title to property [is acquired] by money; the title of an ordinary person to property by hazakah. Ordinary people cannot acquire movable property by using money (see mishnah five), but the Temple can use money to acquire movable property. So if the Temple’s treasurer wants to buy a cow, once he gives the cow’s owner money the cow is sanctified and belongs to the Temple.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Kiddushin
אמירתו לגבוה כמסירתו להדיוט – He who says: “This bull is for a burnt-offering” or “this house is devoted to the Temple treasury, even if it is at the end of the world, he has acquired it. And the common person does not acquire until he pulls the animal’ and takes hold of the house.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Kiddushin
Dedication to the sanctuary is equal to delivery to an ordinary person. A verbal declaration is not sufficient to transfer ownership. In other words, if I just pick up an object and say “This belongs to Reuven”, the object does not yet belong to Reuven. However, when it comes to dedicating something to the Temple, a verbal declaration is sufficient. If I state, “This cow belongs to the Temple,” the cow belongs to the Temple and is considered sacred. We can see through both of these sections that the Temple more easily acquires property than does an ordinary human being.
