(a)Version #1 - Support (Beraisa): If two people were pulling a camel or leading a donkey, or one was pulling and one was 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 that riding does not acquire!)

(b)Rejection: Really, also riding acquires. It mentions only pulling and leading, for the Tana'im argue about these. The first Tana says that either animal is acquired through either of them.

(c)Question: If so, the Beraisa should teach them together! If two people were pulling or riding, whether a camel or donkey...

(d)Answer: One of the two methods does not acquire one of the two animals.

1.Some say that pulling does not acquire a donkey. Others say that leading does not acquire a camel.

(e)Version #2 - Support (Seifa): ... In this way, they acquire. (Usually, 'Mosiv' is a question, but here it is not - Rivan, in Shitah Mekubetzes.)

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: That is R. Yehudah's opinion!

(h)Answer: The first Tana holds that one of these (pulling a donkey, or leading a camel) acquires. R. Yehudah holds that neither acquires.

(i)Question (Beraisa): If Reuven was riding a donkey; and Shimon was holding the halter, Reuven acquires the donkey, Shimon acquires the halter.

1.This shows 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, and Shimon acquires half the halter.

(m)Objection: Granted, Reuven acquires half the halter, for (it is like part of the donkey, and) also the other half is held by one who is able to acquire (Shimon);

1.However, Shimon holds only half (and the donkey holds up the other half). How can he acquire?!

(n)Answer #2: Indeed, Reuven acquires the donkey and the entire halter, except for the part in Shimon's hand, which Shimon acquires.

(o)Objection: Even if you will say that if Levi lifts a Metzi'ah for Yehudah to acquire, Yehudah acquires, that is only if Levi intends for Yehudah to acquire;

1.Here, Shimon holds the halter only to acquire it himself. If he does not acquire (any part of what is outside his hand), will Reuven acquire through Shimon's holding?!

(p)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.

(q)Answer #4 (R. Avahu): The Beraisa is like the simple meaning. Shimon acquires the entire halter; because he could yank it and it would come to him.

(r)Rejection: This is wrong!

1.If it were true, if a garment were 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, would David acquire it all, because he could yank it?! (When two pick up a Metzi'ah, we do not distinguish whether one end was higher than the other!)


(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 discusses two 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). The same applies here!

(h)Answer #2 (Rav Ashi): The Beraisa discusses buying. The case is, the seller told him to acquire like people normally do.


(i)In the following cases, it is normal to ride, and he would acquire:

1.He is on a public road (in the city), he is a distinguished person (it does not befit him to lead it), the buyer is a woman (she is too weak to lead it), he is lowly (he rides anywhere. Average people prefer to lead it, for riding is immodest.)

(j)Question (R. Elazar): If Reuven told Shimon 'Meshoch (take to your Reshus) this animal (with intent) to acquire the Kelim on it', what is the law?

1.Objection: Reuven did not say that he transfers ownership! (His words suggest only that Shimon should intend to acquire.)

2.Correction: Rather, if he said 'Meshoch this animal and acquire the Kelim on it', what is the law?

i.Does pulling the animal acquire the Kelim? (The Gemara never answers the question.)

(k)Question (Rava): R. Elazar asked only about acquiring only the Kelim. This implies that had he said 'acquire the animal and acquire the Kelim', he would acquire;

1.An animal is (like) a moving Chatzer, which is invalid for Kinyan Chatzer

2.Suggestion: Perhaps the case is that the animal stood still!

3.Rejection: Anything that does not acquire if it moves, it does not acquire if it stands still.

(l)Answer: The case is, the animal was tied up and could not move.

(m)Question (against Rava - Rav Papa and Rav Huna brei d'Rav Yehoshua): If fish jumped into a ship, would you say that the ship does not acquire them because it is a moving Chatzer?!

(n)Answer (Rava): The ship is not a moving Chatzer. It stands still, and the water moves it.

(o)Question (Ravina): If a woman was walking in the Reshus ha'Rabim, and her husband threw a Get in her garment or basket, would she not be divorced?!

(p)Answer (Rav Ashi): The basket stands still, and she moves it.


(a)(Mishnah): If Reuven was riding on an animal and saw a Metzi'ah, and told Shimon 'give it to me':

1.If Shimon took it and said 'I acquired it myself', he acquired it;

2.If he said this after giving it to Reuven, Reuven acquired.

(b)(Gemara - Mishnah - R. Eliezer): If Levi gathered Pe'ah and said 'this is for Ploni the Oni', he acquired for him;

(c)Chachamim say, he must give it to the first poor person he finds.

(d)(Ula): They argue about when Levi himself is rich:

1.R. Eliezer holds that Migo (since) if Levi would make his property Hefker, Pe'ah would be fitting for him (to take), even when he is rich, it is fitting for him;

i.Migo he could acquire it for himself, he may acquire it for an Oni.

2.Chachamim hold that we may use only one Migo.

3.All agree that an Oni may acquire for another Oni. Migo he could acquire it for himself, he may acquire it for another.

(e)Question (Rav Nachman): Rather, you should say that they argue about when Levi is poor!

1.Everyone is like an Oni regarding a Metzi'ah (he may take it). In our Mishnah, if Reuven told Shimon 'Give it to me' and Shimon says that he took it for himself, he acquires it;

2.Granted, if they argue about an Oni, our Mishnah is Chachamim (therefore, Reuven does not acquire);

3.But if all agree that an Oni can acquire for another Oni, our Mishnah is not like either Tana!