Study Bava Metzia folio 10B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
רב פפא אמר: כי תקינו ליה רבנן ארבע אמות – בעלמא, בשדה דבעל הבית לא תקינו ליה רבנן. ואף על גב דזכה ליה רחמנא בגוה, כי זכה ליה רחמנא – להלוכי בה ולנקוטי פיאה, למיהוי חצירו לא זכה ליה רחמנא.
Rav Pappa said a different answer: When the rabbis instituted an ordinance that one’s 4 square cubits effect acquisition of property for him, that was in the world, i.e., on public land. But the rabbis did not institute this mode of acquisition for him in a field belonging to an owner. And even though God accorded a poor person certain rights in a landowner’s field during the distribution of pe’a, this mode of acquisition is not included in those rights; when God accorded him rights it was specifically to walk in the field and to collect pe’a, but God did not accord him the right that the field be considered his courtyard with regard to acquiring pe’a. Therefore, the Mishnah in tractate Pe’a does not contradict the statement of Reish Lakish.
אמר רבא, מותיב רבי יעקב בר אידי נזיקין: ראה את המציאה ונפל לו עליה ובא אחר והחזיק בה, זה שהחזיק בה זכה בה. ואי אמרת ארבע אמות של אדם קונות לו בכל מקום – נקנו ליה ארבע אמות דידיה!
As mentioned previously, Rava said that R' Ya’akov bar Idi raises an objection to this from a Mishnah in Nezikin. The Talmud elaborates: The Mishnah here states that if one saw a found item and fell upon it, and another came and seized it, the one who seized it acquired it. And if you say that a person’s 4 square cubits effect acquisition of property for him everywhere, let his 4 square cubits effect acquisition of the found item for him.
הכא במאי עסקינן, דלא אמר ״אקני״. ואי תקון רבנן, כי לא אמר מאי הוי! כיון דנפל עליה, גלי דעתיה דבנפילה ניחא ליה דנקני, בארבע אמות לא ניחא ליה דנקני.
The Talmud answers: Here we are dealing with a case where he did not say: I will acquire it. The Talmud asks: But if the rabbis instituted an ordinance that one’s 4 square cubits effect acquisition of property for him, then even in a case when he did not say: I will acquire the item, what of it? The item should still be his. The Talmud answers: Since he fell upon it, he revealed his intention that it is satisfactory for him to acquire the item by falling on it, and it is not satisfactory for him to acquire the item through the ordinance concerning his 4 square cubits. Since he decided to forgo the mode of acquisition instituted by the rabbis, he does not acquire the found item.