(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


Prepared by Rabbi P. Feldman
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld

Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

Bava Metzia 9


(a) Support (Beraisa): Two people were pulling a camel or leading a donkey, or 1 was pulling and 1 leading - in this way, they acquire;
1. R. Yehudah says, only Meshichah (pulling) acquires a camel, only leading acquires a donkey.
2. [Version #1: The Beraisa mentions pulling and leading, but not riding (this shows - riding does not acquire)!
(b) Rejection: Really, riding also acquires; only pulling and leading are mentioned, for on these they argue, the first Tana says that either animal is acquired through either of them.
(c) Question: If so, the Beraisa should teach them together - Two people were pulling or riding, whether a camel or donkey...
(d) Answer: One of the 2 methods does not acquire 1 of the 2 animals.
1. Some say, pulling does not acquire a donkey; others say, leading does not acquire a camel.]
(e) [Version #2 (Beraisa):...in this way, they acquire.
1. Question: What does this exclude?
2. Suggestion: It excludes riding.
(f) Rejection: No, it excludes pulling a donkey or leading a camel.
(g) Question: But that is R. Yehudah's opinion!
(h) Answer: The first Tana holds that 1 of these acquires (some say, pulling a donkey; others say, leading a camel); R. Yehudah holds that neither acquires.]
(i) Question (Beraisa): Reuven was riding a donkey; Shimon was holding the halter - Reuven acquires the donkey, Shimon acquires the halter.
1. We conclude that riding acquires!
(j) Answer: Here also, he conducts it with his legs.
(k) Question: If so, he should also acquire the halter!
(l) Answer #1: Indeed, (the Beraisa means that) Reuven acquires the donkey and half the halter, Shimon acquires half the halter.
1. We understand how Reuven acquires half the halter, for (it is like part of the donkey, and) the other half is being held by Shimon who is also one who is able to acquire - but Shimon only holds half (and the donkey holds up the other half), how can he acquire?
(m) Answer #2: Indeed, Reuven acquires the donkey and the entire halter, except for the part in Shimon's hand, which Shimon acquires.
(n) Question: Even if you will say that if Levi lifts a found object for Yehudah to acquire, Yehudah acquires - that is only if Levi intends for Yehudah to acquire;
1. Here, Shimon only holds the halter to acquire it himself - if he does not acquire it, will Reuven acquire through Shimon's holding?!
(o) Answer #3 (Rav Ashi): Indeed, Reuven acquires the donkey and the part of the halter in the donkey's mouth, Shimon acquires the part he holds, neither acquires the rest of the halter.
(p) Answer #4 (R. Avahu): The Beraisa is as the simple meaning - Shimon acquires the entire halter; because he could yank it and it would come to him.
(q) Rejection: This is wrong!
1. If it was true - if a garment was half on the floor and half on a post, and David picked up the part on the floor, and then Moshe picked up the part on the post, did David acquire it all, because he could yank it?!
(a) Question (Beraisa - R. Eliezer): Riding in a field or leading in a city acquires.
(b) Answer: There also, he conducts with his legs.
(c) Question #1: If so, that is also leading!
(d) Answer: The Beraisa speaks of 2 kinds of leading.
(e) Question #2: If so, why doesn't riding in a city acquire?
(f) Answer #1 (Rav Kahana): It is abnormal to ride in the city.
(g) Objection: (Rav Ashi): If so, one who picks up a wallet on Shabbos does not acquire, for it is abnormal to do so!
1. That is not so - what he did, he did (and he acquires) - here also!
(h) Answer #2 (Rav Ashi): The Beraisa speaks of buying; the case is, the seller told him to acquire as people normally do.

1. In the following cases, it is normal to ride, he would acquire: on a public road (in the city), a distinguished person (it is not befitting him to lead it), a woman (is unable to lead it), an undignified person (he rides anywhere).
(i) Question (R. Elazar): Reuven told Shimon 'Pull this animal (in order) to acquire the vessels on it' - what is the law?
1. Objection: He did not tell him to acquire! (The language suggests that Shimon should acquire without Reuven's intention to transfer ownership.)
2. Correction: Rather, he said 'Pull this animal and acquire the vessels on it' - what is the law?
i. Does pulling the animal acquire the vessels?
3. Question (Rava): Since R. Elazar only asked when he acquires the vessels alone - this implies, if he said 'Acquire the animal and acquire the vessels', he would acquire;
i. But the animal is (like) a moving Chatzer, which does not qualify for Kinyan Chatzer
4. Suggestion: Perhaps the case is, the animal stood still!
5. Rejection: Anything that does not acquire if it moves, it does not acquire if it stands still.
6. Answer: The case is, the animal was tied up and could not move.
7. Question (against Rava - Rav Papa and Rav Huna brei d'Rav Yehoshua): Would you say that if fish jumped into a ship, the ship does not acquire them because it is a moving Chatzer?!
8. Answer (Rava): The ship stands still, the water moves it.
(j) Question (Ravina): If a woman was walking in the public domain, and her husband threw a Get in her garment or basket, she would not be divorced?!
(k) Answer (Rav Ashi): The basket stands still, she moves it.
(a) (Mishnah): Reuven was riding on an animal and saw (found) something; he told Shimon 'Give it to me'. Shimon took it and said 'I acquired it myself' - he acquires it;
1. If he said this after giving it to Reuven, Reuven acquires.
(b) (Gemara - Mishnah - R. Eliezer): Levi gathered Pei'ah and said 'this is for Ploni the poor man' - he acquired for him;
1. Chachamim say, he must give it to the first poor person he finds.
(c) (Ula): The argument is when Levi himself is rich:
1. R. Eliezer holds, Migo (since if) Levi would make his property Hefker, Pei'ah would apply to him (he could take it), even when he is rich, it applies to him;
i. Migo (since) he could acquire it for himself, he may acquire it for a poor person.
2. Chachamim hold, we may only use 1 'Migo'.
i. All agree that a poor person may acquire for another poor person - Migo he could acquire it for himself, he may acquire it for another.
(d) Question (Rav Nachman): Rather, you should say that they argue when Levi is poor!
1. Regarding a found object, everyone is (allowed to take it) like a poor person - and our Mishnah says, Reuven was riding on an animal and saw something; he told Shimon 'Give it to me'. Shimon took it and said 'I acquired it myself' - he acquires it;
i. If you say that they argue by a poor person - our Mishnah is as Chachamim (therefore, Reuven does not acquire);
ii. But if all agree that a poor person may acquire for another poor person - our Mishnah is not as either Tana!
(e) Answer (Ula): Our Mishnah is when Shimon said before picking it up that he picks it up for himself.
(f) Support (end of the Mishnah): If after giving it to Reuven, he said 'I acquired it for myself first' - Reuven acquired it.
1. Question: Obviously, he means that he acquired for himself first - why must he say first?
2. Answer: This teaches that in the beginning of the Mishnah, he said before picking it up that he picks it up for himself.
(g) Rav Nachman understands, the Tana put the word first only in the second clause to indicate that in the first clause, he did not say this before picking it up.
Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,