More Discussions for this daf
1. The Shevu'ah of Shenayim Ochzin 2. Picking up a Metzi'ah 3. Owning all of it
4. Sumchus or the Rabanan 5. Tosfos DH Yachloku 6. Questions in Rashi
7. Case of Mekach U'Memkar 8. Rashi According to Maskanas ha'Gemara 9. Shenayim Ochzin b'Talis
10. "It is all mine" 11. Arguing over a lost object that was found 12. Causing a Shevu'as Shav in our Mishnah
13. Teaching that Re'iyah is not Koneh 14. Two versions 15. Comparing 3/4 Talis oath with devolved oath
16. Acquiring through seeing 17. Terms of Chazakah and ownership 18. בבא מציעא ב. תד"ה בראיה - הבטה בהפקר
DAF DISCUSSIONS - BAVA METZIA 2

Sam Cohen asked:

How do we learn from the fact the Tanna adds the clause ve-zeh oimer kulah sheli (each says that "it is all mine") that with sight alone one does not acquire?

In other words, how do those words show that sight alone is insufficient?

Sam Cohen, Brooklyn, NY, USA

The Kollel replies:

Rashi (as explained in Shitah Mikubezes) says that the term "it is all mine" is used only if a person has physical contact with the item. The Ra'avad writes that one cannot clearly say "it is all mine" by sight alone for he cannot be sure that another did not see it.

D. Zupnik