bava mezia page 46 n and kidushin 28

The Gemara, at some point, asks how would Rav Nachman explain the Mishna in Kiddushin 28 . The reason is we say the beginning of the Mishna refers to coin, and the end to exchange by exchange. The gemara answers an answer that goes according to R. Yochanan, but then what would Reish Lakish answer. I ask, "Why not say that Reish Lakish holds coin does not cause exchange, just like he says by normal acquisition that coin does not cause acquisition, rather picking up or pulling the acquired object?" I ask why not say Reish Lakish disagrees with the entire assumption. Rather, only picking up or pulling causes acquisition Even by means of exchange? I think I might add here that Rav Nachman learns the end of the Mishna as exchange of ox for a cow, not meat of an ox for a cow. Only in the "I might have thought “does the Gemara have to say that the Mishna refers to meat. And we ask according to that assumption how would Rav Nachman explain the mMishna . But, in fact, Rav Nachman does not hold with that "I might have thought “ and holds the Mishna says “exchange of a ox for a cow”, not meat. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------The גמראat some point asks how would רב נחמן explain the משנה onקידושין כ''ח . the reason is we say the beginning of the משנה refers to coin and the end to exchange by exchange. The גמרא answers an answer that gores according to ר' יוחנןbut then what would ריש לקיש answer. I ask why not say that ריש לקיש holds coin does not cause exchange just like he says by acquisition that coin does not cause acquisition, rather picking up or pulling the acquired object. I ask why not say ריש לקיש disagrees with the entire assumption. Rather, only picking up or pulling. Even to acquire by means of exchange? I think I might add here that רב נחמןlearns the end of the משנה as exchange of ox for a cow, not meat of an ox for a cow. Only in the "I might have thought “does the גמרא have to say that the משנה refers to meat. And we ask according to that assumption how would רב נחמן explain the משנה. But, in fact, רב נחמן does not hold with that "I might have thought “ and holds the משנה says “exchange of a ox for a cow”, not meat.