Greetings and Salutations:
This is a question about an incident which occurred with Rav Huna in BABA BASRA on the bottom of daf 54(b). and the top of 55(a) in which Rav Huna purchased or bought land from an idolater and an interloper came and dug a little of the land and claimed that it was his according to the rule of Schmuel. Now Schmuel ruled earlier that land owned by an idolater and sold to a Jew is like ownerless land of desart in between the time of the owners's receipt of the money and and the buyers's act of aquisition. Consequently anyone who performs a properrietary act during this time acquirexs the property in question. see comentary of Rashbam)
My problem is that a KYINYAN cHALIFIN was in the process of completeion and thus the sale and transfer should have been valid and Schmuel's ruling should not have been applicable to this particular incident because the kinyan was in the prcess of occuring and the interloper interrupted this legal action. So, therefroe, I cannot understand how they could apply Schmuel's ruling to this particular instance. yes, the land could be considered as a desart, but yet would not the effect that an agreement or kinyan was in the process void any third party involvment.
Thank you very much in advance.
Have a Good Shabbos
Lloyd A Cohen
I did not find mention of a Sudar (Kinyan Chalifin) in the Gemara. But even in the case that Shmuel discusses a Kinyan is "in process," i.e. he has already given the money to the seller and is just waiting to receive the Shtar. Nevertheless, since the Kinyan has not been consummated, another person can be Koneh. In fact, the opposite might be true: Had the Kinyan not yet begun, the land would still belong to the seller (the non-Jew), and it would not yet be like a Midbar for all to grab.
D. Zupnik