At the bottom of 4B is a reference to another mishna in kiddushin, shavuos, and later in Bava Metzia, regarding a mixture of a claim of items with achrayos and items without achrayos.

There seems to be a parallel that since karka is sold with achrayos by default, and keilim without achrayos by default, that we should presume that the reason for the exemption of shavua on claims involving karka is due to achrayos.

I would like to ask on this presumption to see if anyone questions the applicability of that mishna to our case on any grounds such as that the exemption on karka, from the Torah apparently (given the earlier discussion in our gemara with its quoted passuk as the source for Modeh b'Miksas), would still apply even in a case where the default rules were specifically not applicable being explicitly in a shtar that the land was sold without achrayos, or if vessels were sold with achrayos?

I believe this topic came up within the 2nd or 3rd perek of Bava Basra when I learned it b'keyus last year, regarding defaults and the exceptions to default.

Could it be that the exemption on shavua for karka is for a reason other than achrayos, and that we cannot be certain of the direct applicability of this referenced mishna to our case?

The Kollel's guidance for how such a case would be dealt with in practical terms as well as my questioning if the intended parallel is such a given would be very much appreciated.

Chaim Chesler