Beitza 39 a, b

Completing yesterday's conversation, the rabbis talk through the nullification of water and salt.  Water and salt are nullified when they dissolve into another food during preparation.  If the grains of salt are from Mount Sodom, for example, and can be detected one the food is prepared, the salt is not nullified. Similarly, if a dish has a thin, watery sauce after cooking, the water added that food is not nullified.

A new Mishna teaches us about the differences between coal and flames.  It goes into detail regarding five distinct differences.  Coal is an object, and thus it can only be carried by its owner within the Shabbat boundaries.  Flames, however, are not understood as objects.  Thus there is no limitation on how far or where they can travel on Shabbat.  For some reason, flames can be transferred and used without penalty even if they are originally being used for idol worship.  Clearly the rabbis consider flame to be insignificant and thus without influence.

Another new Mishna considers water removed from cisterns.  If an individual owns the cistern, water removed is as the feet of the owner.  If a cistern is jointly owned, water removed is as the feet of the entire community.  And if a cistern is owned by visiting Babylonians, each person who removes water is liable on her/his own.  The Gemara debates a number of issues raised here, including standing versus flowing water, and whether or not a public cistern is ownerless.

Amud (b) shares a more in-depth explanation of ownership.  We learn that things that are ownerless are thought of as coming 'from Babylonia'.  Further, people can declare charem: they are not able to derive benefit from another person or thing.  It is particularly interesting to me that a person can declare charem on another; that second person is not permitted to derive benefit from the person who is making the statement.  How can one person make a vow on behalf of another?  I can understand vowing that others cannot benefit from us, but how can we control the benefits given to others?

We are given lists of things that are coming up from Babylonia (ownerless) and of things that are jointly owned by the people of a city. Of note is that a synagogue is understood as jointly owned.  I wonder how that works within today's economy.

The rabbis discuss ownership with regard to inheritance and its division between brothers.  The notion of ownership is one I have not yet learned in my Talmud study and I realize that I comprehend very little of its principles and philosophies.  The rabbis also look at found items in their conversation.

We end with a new Mishna that I found rather confusing.  If one who sells produce leaves that produce in another city on Shabbat, and there is a joining of Shabbat boundaries, the seller is still not permitted to retrieve his produce in Shabbat.  Instead, someone must place an eiruv between the cities.  In this way the seller can ensure that he is able to walk and carry his produce on Shabbat

So many of our halachot are inconvenient and even detrimental.  How is it that we should be asked to comply, particularly when the halachot are rabbinical and not Torah-taught?