Study Ketubot folio 92A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
and Reuven’s creditor came and repossessed the field from him, i.e., from Reuven, the law is that Shimon must go and compensate [mefatzei] Reuven, since he sold him the field with a guarantee, while Reuven owes Shimon nothing, since he sold him the field without a guarantee.
Rava said to him: Granted, that Shimon took upon himself to guarantee the sale in general, i.e., if the field were to be repossessed by his own creditors or those of a previous owner of the field; did he also take upon himself to guarantee the sale if it were to be repossessed by the purchaser’s ow
The Talmud notes: And Rava concedes to Rami bar Ḥama in the following case: Reuven inherited a field from his father, Ya’akov, and sold it to Shimon with no guarantee. Shimon came and sold it back to Reuven with a guarantee. Then, Ya’akov’s creditor came and repossessed the field from Reuven. In th
The Talmud asks: What is the reason for this halakha? The Talmud answers: Ya’akov’s creditor is comparable to a general case of a creditor, i.e., a creditor of a previous owner. Even Rava would agree that this is not comparable to a case where Reuven’s creditor repossessed the field. Consequently, S
Rami bar Ḥama said: Consider a case where Reuven sold a field to Shimon with a guarantee that if it is repossessed he will compensate Shimon for his loss. Shimon did not pay for the purchase, and instead set up the value of the field as a loan by writing a promissory note for this amount. Reuven su