Bava Metzia 118: What Belongs to Whom; Rights of the Owner vs. Rights of the Public

Our daf first hosts a conversation about our last Mishna, regarding when payment might not be transferable from money to produce or vice versa.  The Gemara walks through a number of possible reasons for trading money for produce both at the will of the labourer and at the will of the employer. One of their more interesting questions (to me) refers to a labourer who finds a lost item while doing his work in the field.  Can the item be kept by the labourer? The rabbis walk through the possible contractual agreement between these two people.  Again, we note that labour law is a focal point for our rabbis throughout Bava Metzia, and the contract between employer and labourer is of utmost importance.  

A new Mishna is the second last Mishna in our masechet.  It teaches about the rights of an owner against those of the public.  We learn that an owner is not entitled to leave his manure in the public domain; it must be moved immediately from his farm to the buyer's farm to be used as fertilizer.  Similarly, people are not permitted to leave clay to soak nor may they told picks in the public domain.   Kneading clay is permitted, but kneading bricks is not permitted because of the time it will take so to finish this task.  The Mishna tells us that people can prepare their work for thirty days in advance to ensure that the work done in public is as brief as possible.

The Gemara discusses the making of fertilizer.  When multiple people tread over manure, that manure becomes much more valuable fertilizer.  The thirty-day limit on leaving this manure in the public domain would allow for people and animals to walk upon it for long enough to benefit its owner.  The Gemara notes that the inconvenience of many is simply a nuisance, but the benefits of good fertilizer outweigh that consequence.

Another example brought to our minds is that of an oven built on the second story of a building.  The second floor's owner must build a plaster floor that is at least three handbreadths thick.  This floor will serve as the ceiling of the first floor - and the first floor's protection from a falling oven.  A stove requires the same floor/ceiling but only of one handbreadth's thickness.  If the floor falls, the rabbis question who should pay for damages.  Some say that the second floor owner should do so.  Others suggest that he took all precautions and so he should be exempt.  

Our daf ends with the final Mishna of our Masechet.  It discusses two gardens, one built beside the other but up a small, steep incline so that one is above the other.  If vegetables grow between them, to whom does the produce belong?  The rabbis argue first about which owner's different types of care provided for this growth.  Rabbi Meir suggests that we cannot decide based on this consideration, for both will argue convincingly against the other.  Perhaps we can determine whether the specific vegetables were similar to those above or below this growth.  Rabbi Shimon says that any vegetables that the owner of the upper garden can stretch to reach with his arm belong to him. The remainder belong to the owner of the lower garden.  

The Gemara wonders whether or not we should follow the roots of the vegetable to determine their origin.  Rabbi Emir says, "Cast its leaves after its root".  Rabbi Yehuda disagrees.  The Gemara ends with a reminder about plants that grow from the trunk and the roots of a tree.  Rabbi Meir says that these belong to the land's owner.  Rabbi Yehuda says that growth from the trunk belongs to the owner of the tree, and growth from the roots belong to the owner of the land.  Thus roots do not determine ownership, according to Rabbi Yehuda.