Bava Batra

if with the idea of becoming owner of both, he becomes owner of that one but not of the other;  if with the idea of becoming owner of the other, he does not acquire ownership even of that one.  R. Zera put the following question: Suppose he takes possession of one of them with the idea of becoming owner of that one and of the boundary and of the other one, how do we decide? Do we say that the boundary goes with this field and with that  and so he acquires the whole, or do we say that the boundary and the fields are separate?  This question must stand over. R. Eleazar put the question: Suppose he takes possession of the boundary with the idea of becoming owner of both fields, how do we decide? Do we say that the boundary is as it were the bridle of the land  and so he acquires ownership, or are boundary and field separate? — This question [also] must stand over. R. Nahman said in the name of Rabbah b. Abbuha: If there are [in a house] two rooms, one of which can only be reached through the other,  then if a man takes possession of the outer room with the idea of becoming its owner, he acquires ownership of it; if with the idea of becoming owner of both rooms, he acquires ownership of the outer room but not of the inner one; if with the idea of becoming owner of the inner room, he does not acquire ownership even of the outer one. If he takes possession of the inner one with the idea of becoming its owner, he acquires ownership of that one; if with the idea of becoming owner of both, he does acquire ownership of both;  if with the idea of becoming owner of the outer one [only], he does not acquire ownership even of the inner one. R. Nahman further said in the name of Rabbah b. Abbuha: If a man builds a large villa on the estate of a [deceased] proselyte and another man comes and fixes the doors, the latter becomes owner. Why is this? Because the first one merely deposited bricks there. R. Dimi b. Joseph said in the name of R. Eleazar: If a man finds a villa already erected on the estate of a [deceased] proselyte, and he adds one coat of whitewash or mural decoration, he acquires ownership.  How much must he whitewash or decorate? R. Joseph says: A cubit. To which R. Hisda added: And it must be by the door. R. Amram said: The following dictum was enunciated to us by R. Shesheth, and he showed us the proof of it from a Baraitha:  If a man spreads mattresses on the floor of a proselyte's estate [and sleeps on it], he thereby acquires ownership.  How did he 'show proof of this from a Baraitha'? — [By citing the following passage] which has been taught: How is ownership [of a slave] acquired by 'taking possession'?  If the slave fastens or undoes his master's shoe, or carries his clothes behind him to the bath, or undresses him, washes him, anoints him, scrapes him, dresses him, puts his shoes on  or lifts him up, he becomes his owner.  R. Simeon said: possession of this kind cannot be more effective than lifting up, seeing that it confers ownership in all cases. What does this mean? — We must understand the passage thus: If the slave lifts his master up, the latter acquires possession, but if his master lifts him up, he does not. R. Simeon said: possession cannot be more effective than lifting, seeing that it confers ownership in all cases. R. Jeremiah Bira'ah said in the name of Rab Judah: If a man