Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) TWO THAT PICK SOMETHING UP TOGETHER

(a) (Rami bar Chama): This teaches that one can pick up an object to acquire for another - if not, it would be as if each holds half, and the other half is on the ground (and he does not acquire).
(b) Rejection (Rava): Really, one cannot pick up an object to acquire for another - here, the reason is Migo that he can acquire for himself, he can acquire for another.

1. Support: If Reuven told an agent 'Steal for me', Reuven is exempt - but partners that steal are liable;

(c) The reason is, Migo that he can acquire for himself, he can acquire for another.
(d) (Rava): Since we say Migo - a deaf person and a healthy person that lifted a found object - since the deaf person acquires, also the healthy person.

1. We understand how the deaf person acquires - (Chachamim enacted that he acquires what he finds), and a healthy person lifts the other half for him;
2. Question: How does the healthy person acquire?

(e) Correction: Rather, the deaf person acquires, the healthy person does not.

1. Question: How does this rely on Migo?
2. Answer: Migo that 2 deaf people that picked up a found object together would acquire, a deaf person also acquires when he picks it up with a healthy person.

(f) Objection: Even if you will say that one can pick up an object to acquire for another - that is only if he intends for the other to acquire - but here, the healthy person picks up for himself and does not acquire - does he acquire for someone else?!
(g) Correction: Rather, since the healthy person does not acquire, nor does the deaf person.
(h) Question: Why is this different than 2 deaf people that pick up together, who acquire?
(i) Answer: That is an enactment to avoid quarrels - here, the deaf person realizes that the healthy person does not acquire, he does not expect that he should acquire.
(j) Question (Rav Acha brei d'Rav Ada): What was Rami bar Chama's source (that 2 people who pick up something together, they acquire)?

1. If from the first clause - 2 people holding a garment - there, each claims that he picked it up himself!

(k) Answer #1: Rather, since it says 'Reuven says, it is all mine, Shimon says, it is all mine' - this is extra, to teach that one can pick up an object to acquire for another.
(l) Objection: But we established that 'I found it' speaks of a found object, 'it is all mine' speaks of a bought object!
(m) Answer #2: Rather, from the second clause - 'Reuven says, it is all mine, Shimon says, half is mine';

1. This is extra, to teach that one can pick up an object to acquire for another.

(n) Question: Perhaps that case refers to a bought object, not a found object!

1. Question: If so, what is the Chidush?
2. Answer: One might have thought, by only claiming half, Shimon is as one who returns a lost object, and is exempt from swearing;
3. We hear, this is not so - he is scheming to avoid swearing - he knows that if he claims the entire object, he must swear, so he claims only half, to be as one who returns a lost object.

(o) Answer #3: Rather, from the third clause: two people were riding on an animal...

1. This is extra, to teach that one can pick up an object to acquire for another.

(p) Objection: Perhaps this teaches that riding also acquires!
(q) Answer #4: Rather, from the last clause: 'When they admit, or have witnesses, they divide without swearing'.

1. Question: What is the case?

i. If by a bought object - this is obvious!

2. Answer: Rather, it is by a found object; it teaches that one can pick up an object to acquire for another.
3. Rava says, it teaches that Migo he can acquire for himself, he can acquire for another.

(a) Answer #2 (to question 3:h (5B) - Abaye): The oath of the Mishnah is because we suspect that Reuven lent Shimon money a long time ago (and Shimon has forgotten this), therefore he grabbed his garment to get repaid.
(b) Question: If so, we should let them divide it without swearing!
(c) Correction: We suspect that Reuven is unsure whether Shimon owes him from an old loan, therefore he grabbed his garment.
(d) Question: If he will grab money when in doubt, he will also swear when in doubt!
(e) Answer (Rav Sheshes brei d'Rav Idi): People refrain from taking an oath which may be false, but not from doubtful theft.
(f) Question: Why is this?
(g) Answer: One can return money, but one cannot correct swearing falsely.

(a) (Mishnah): If both were riding...
(b) (Rav Yosef): Shmuel taught Rav Yehudah: riding and leading, 1 acquires, 1 does not - Rav Yehudah didn't know which acquires.

(c) Question: What is the case?

1. If 1 person rides or leads alone - would anyone say that leading does not acquire?! Surely, he would know that leading acquires!

(d) Answer: Rather, Shmuel spoke of leading while another is riding. Rav Yehudah was unsure if riding is better, for he holds the animal himself (Rashi; Tosfos - he holds the halter);

1. Or - perhaps leading is better, for he causes the animal to go.

(e) [Version #1 - Rav Yehudah: We may resolve this from a Mishnah: One who is leading 2 different species pulling a wagon, and one who sits in the wagon - both are lashed;

1. R. Meir exempts the one in the wagon.
2. Shmuel: The opinions must be switched - Chachamim exempt the one in the wagon.
3. Rav Yehudah: we conclude that Shmuel holds that riding alone does not acquire, all the more so riding when another is leading.

(f) Question (Rav Yosef): How can you learn riding from sitting in a wagon - one who sits does not hold the Mosirah (halter)!
(g) Answer (Rav Yehudah): Rav and Shmuel both say, holding the halter does not acquire a Hefker animal.]
(h) [Version #2: Rav Yosef resolved from the Mishnah as above.
(i) Question (Abaye): How can you learn riding from sitting in a wagon - one who sits does not hold the halter!
(j) Answer (Rav Yosef): Idi taught, holding the halter does not acquire a Hefker animal.]
(k) (R. Chelbo): Taking the halter from the seller acquires, but this does not acquire a Hefker animal.
(l) Question: What is the significance of the language 'Mosira'?
(m) Answer (Idi): As a person who Moser (hands over) something to another person.

1. This applies to buying - but by Hefker, no one gives it over!

(n) Question (Mishnah): If both were riding on an animal...

1. Question: Who is the Tana of the Mishnah?

i. Suggestion: R. Meir.
ii. Rejection: He holds that even sitting in the wagon acquires!

2. Answer: Rather, it must be as Chachamim - we see, riding acquires!

(o) Answer: The Mishnah is when he conducts it with his legs.
(p) Question: But the end of the Mishnah says that one was riding and one was leading (if he conducts with his legs, both lead it)!
(q) Answer: The Mishnah speaks of 2 kinds of leading.

1. One might have thought, riding is better, because he both leads and holds the animal - we hear, this is not so.