Commentary for Bava Batra 172:2

הכא במאי עסקינן בשליפי רברבי אי הכי אימא סיפא הלוקח פשתן מחבירו לא קנה עד שיטלטלנו ממקום זה למקום אחר אטו פשתן בשליפי רברבי מי לא עבדי שאני פשתן דמשתמיט

If so,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That the Mishnah deals with fruit in large bags. ');">⁴</span> [how can you] explain the last clause [which reads]. IF ONE BUYS FLAX FROM ANOTHER. HE DOES NOT ACQUIRE OWNERSHIP UNTIL HE MOVES IT FROM ONE PLACE TO ANOTHER. Is not flax [also] packed in large bags?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If the first clause, (fruit), deals with small bags, the final clause also (flax), would, consequently, deal with small bags. The reason for the difference between the modes of acquiring ownership, ('pulling' in the first, 'lifting' in the second case). could then be explained by the fact that flax is never dragged but always lifted. Thus, the purpose of our Mishnah would be the laying down of the following law: Things which are usually lifted may be acquired not only by 'lifting' but also by 'pulling' — (first clause); while things which are always lifted can be acquired by lifting only — (final clause). If, however, it be assumed that the reason why in the first clause 'pulling' is effective, is only that the fruit is packed in large bags it must consequently be assumed that the reason why the flax cannot be acquired thus, but only by 'lifting', is that it is packed in small bags. If so, it is asked, is not flax also packed in large bags? And if they are so packed, wherein lies the cause of the different modes of acquisition? ');">⁵</span> — Flax is different — [It has to be packed in small bags] because, [otherwise]. it slips out.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Small bags are usually lifted, hence only 'lifting', and not 'pulling', is the mode of acquisition. ');">⁶</span>

Explore commentary for Bava Batra 172:2. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.