One who does a formal act of acquisition to acquire something for someone else – the Gemara now says that won’t work, in contrast to the previous Gemara. The comparison to a debtor and creditor explains why. Plus, a rider asking for the reins of the animal he’s riding – where the language used makes the difference. Also, a new mishnah: one finds an item and another party seizes it – who has acquired it? Plus, proximity isn’t enough to acquire an object. The illustration case is pe’ah, acquiring the produce from the corners of a field – where the acquisition might be accomplished by proximity, but it’s private property, so that won’t work. Plus, how the 4 amot (proximity) acquisition takes effect.
Click here for the Talking Talmud podcast on Bava Metzia 10/1a>.
To listen: Click the link above. Or subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. Or join the Talking Talmud WhatsApp group, and receive the link as soon as it goes up.
