Inference: From here we learn that the time that Beis Din gives to pay a loan and various matters is 30 days.

Also R. Shimon ben Gamliel said above (113a) that even to [the borrower] himself (and all the more so, his orphans) one returns the security only for 30 days.

Distinction: However, he did not say that for all damages, the time of Beis Din is 30 days, like here.

Source: Above (82b), regarding one whose jug broke and he did not clear away (the shards), or his camel fell and he did not stand it up, R. Meir obligates in the damages...

There, the time of Beis Din is not 30 days, like it connotes in Bava Kama (29a).

The reason is because he can remove [the shards or camel] in a short time.

Implied question: One who is Mafkir his Nezakav after falling through Ones, we say in Bava Kama (29a) that he is exempt!

Answer: Here, he evades (his obligation to remove them). He is not Mafkir them, like it says in the Gemara.

Inference: If not for R. Yosi b'Ribi Chanina's teaching, it is fine, for he acquires only when he stands next to his field. Therefore, if he did not clear them away, no (the owner can take back his rocks);

This is because when he said "they are yours", he was no longer standing there.

Question: According to the current Havah Amina, why must he say "take what you did for your wages"? He can say "I will not give to you anything, for you did not do anything for me!" (Mayanei ha'Chachmah - the Havah Amina is that he is liable like an Arev, and Bal Talin does not apply. Gaon Tzvi - the one for whom he worked says so. We heed him, for Shaveh Kesef is like Kesef. Birkas Shmuel (26:5) - the question was whether in this case he is considered a worker who must be paid what was stipulated, and we do not say that Shaveh Kesef is like Kesef.)

Inference: Only if he hired him to work in his own [and showed him another's property], then he must pay him his full wage, but Stam, no (he is exempt).

Question: If so, why did we need to answer "here in his own [property], and here in Hefker?" We should answer that here he hired him to work in his own, and here he hired him to work in another's!

Answer (Ri): We did not answer this, for obviously, if he hired him to work in another's, we heed him;

However, what he answered above "here is in another's", this is a Chidush that we heed him, for this does not remain (it is not correct).

Similarly, "here in Hefker" is a Chidush, and also what it answers at the end that regarding looking, we heed him, this is a Chidush. It teaches that looking at Hefker does not acquire.

Reference: I explained this above (DH Lishmor. The Shomer never protested against one who wanted to take], just he informed people that they were designated for the Omer, and people refrained by themselves from taking.)

Question: Why don't we answer that our Mishnah is not at the time of taking out manure, and it is like everyone, like we answer in Bava Kama (30a) about the Mishnah there?

Answer #1: Here, it is obvious to him that we discuss not at the time of taking out manure, therefore it was not difficult for him that our Mishnah obligates to fertilize immediately, and R. Yehudah permits to leave it for 30 days;

However, [our Mishnah] cannot be like R. Yehudah, for it obligates to pay what he damaged, even if he damaged in the small time he is allowed to leave it, and according to R. Yehudah, at that time he is exempt, since he has permission.

Answer #2: Our Mishnah connotes that it discusses at the time of taking out manure, since it teaches "one who takes out manure, takes out manure", which connotes at the time that it is normal to take out manure.

Question: Why wasn't it difficult that R. Yehudah permits for 30 days, and our Mishnah [permits only] immediately?

Answer: This is because one can say that our Mishnah gives good counsel that he rush [to fertilize, and not leave it around], lest he need to pay what he damaged.