Study Bava Kamma folio 30B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
What we learned in the Mishnah was specifically with regard to a case where one put out his straw and his hay, which are more likely to cause injury than fertilizer and other objects, because they are particularly slippery. Therefore, R' Yehuda agrees that in this case he is liable to pay for dama
§ It is stated in the Mishnah that if one puts his straw and hay out in the public domain, whoever takes possession of them first acquires them. The rabbis disagreed with regard to the extent of this acquisition. Rav says: He acquires them both with regard to the items themselves and with regard to
With regard to what do they disagree? Rav holds that the rabbis penalized the owner by revoking his ownership of the items themselves due to the value of their enhancement that he stands to earn by putting them in the public domain, whereas Ze’eiri holds that they did not penalize him by revoking hi
The Talmud attempts to prove that Ze’eiri’s opinion is correct from a case where there is no enhancement at all. We learned in the continuation of the Mishnah that in the case of one who turns over dung in the public domain and another person incurred damage due to it, the former is liable to pay f
The Talmud answers: The halakha that whoever takes possession of it acquires it is taught in the first clause, with regard to one who puts out straw, and the same is true in the last clause, with regard to one who turns over dung. It is unnecessary to repeat it. Therefore, no support for the opini