## Bava Metzia Daf 25a

###### Bava Metzia 25a:1
[Bava Metzia 25a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/25a:1)

שְׁלֹשָׁה מַטְבְּעוֹת זֶה עַל גַּב זֶה, כְּרִיכוֹת בִּרְשׁוּת הַיָּחִיד, וְכִכָּרוֹת שֶׁל בַּעַל הַבַּיִת, וְגִיזֵּי צֶמֶר הַלְּקוּחִין מִבֵּית הָאוּמָּן, כַּדֵּי יַיִן וְכַדֵּי שֶׁמֶן – הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ חַיָּיב לְהַכְרִיז.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**three coins** stacked **one atop another; bundles** of grain **in a secluded area; loaves of a homeowner,** as each shapes his loaves in his own unique manner; **wool fleeces that are taken from the house of a craftsman,** as each craftsman processes the wool in his own unique manner; **jugs of wine; or jugs of oil.** If one finds any of **these,** he is **obligated to proclaim** his find.


###### Bava Metzia 25a:2
[Bava Metzia 25a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/25a:2)

**גְּמָ׳** טַעְמָא דְּמָצָא פֵּירוֹת בִּכְלִי וּמָעוֹת בְּכִיס. הָא כְּלִי וּלְפָנָיו פֵּירוֹת, כִּיס וּלְפָנָיו מָעוֹת – הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ שֶׁלּוֹ. תְּנֵינָא לְהָא, דְּתָנוּ רַבָּנַן: מָצָא כְּלִי וּלְפָנָיו פֵּירוֹת, כִּיס וּלְפָנָיו מָעוֹת – הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ שֶׁלּוֹ. מִקְצָתָן בַּכְּלִי וּמִקְצָתָן עַל גַּבֵּי קַרְקַע, מִקְצָתָן בַּכִּיס וּמִקְצָתָן עַל גַּבֵּי קַרְקַע – חַיָּיב לְהַכְרִיז.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The Gemara infers from the mishna: **The reason** one is obligated to proclaim his find is **that he found produce inside the vessel or coins inside the pouch; but** if he found **a vessel and produce** was **before it,** or if he found **a pouch and coins** were **before it, those,** the produce and coins, belong **to him.** The Gemara comments: **We learn** from this mishna by inference **that** which **the Sages taught** explicitly in a *baraita*: If one found **a vessel and produce** was **before it,** or if he found **a pouch and coins** were **before it, those,** the produce and coins, belong **to him.** If **some of** the produce is **in the vessel and some of** the produce is **on the ground,** or if **some of** the coins are **inside the pouch and some of them** are **on the ground,** one is **obligated to proclaim** his find.


###### Bava Metzia 25a:3
[Bava Metzia 25a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/25a:3)

וּרְמִינְהוּ: מָצָא דָּבָר שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ סִימָן בְּצַד דָּבָר שֶׁיֵּשׁ בּוֹ סִימָן – חַיָּיב לְהַכְרִיז. בָּא בַּעַל סִימָן וְנָטַל אֶת שֶׁלּוֹ – זָכָה הַלָּה בְּדָבָר שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ סִימָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** the Gemara **raises a contradiction** from another *baraita*: If one **found an item on which there is no distinguishing mark alongside an item on which there is a distinguishing mark,** he is **obligated to proclaim** that he found both. If the **owner of** the item with the **distinguishing mark came and took his** item but did not claim ownership of the other item, **the other** person, who found the items, **acquires the item on which there is no distinguishing mark.** This *halakha* should also apply when one finds a vessel on which there is a distinguishing mark and produce on which there is no distinguishing mark.


###### Bava Metzia 25a:4
[Bava Metzia 25a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/25a:4)

אָמַר רַב זְבִיד, לָא קַשְׁיָא: הָא בְּכוּבָּא וְכִיתָּנָא, הָא בְּצַנָּא וּפֵירֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara cites several possible resolutions to this contradiction. **Rav Zevid said** that this is **not difficult: This** *baraita*, **where** the finder is obligated to proclaim his finding of both the vessel and the produce, is referring **to a container and flax.** Since the flax fibers are intertwined, when part of the flax falls out of the container, all of the flax would fall out. Therefore, the fact that the flax is completely outside the container is not an indication that it was never in the container. **That** mishna, from which it is inferred that produce found outside the vessel belongs to the finder, is referring **to a basket and produce.** Had the produce fallen out of the basket, presumably some produce would remain in the basket, because the individual units of produce are not connected. Therefore, the fact that no produce was found in the basket indicates that the produce did not fall out of the basket.


###### Bava Metzia 25a:5
[Bava Metzia 25a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/25a:5)

רַב פָּפָּא אָמַר: הָא וְהָא בְּצַנָּא וּפֵירֵי, וְלָא קַשְׁיָא: הָא דְּאִשְׁתְּיַיר בַּהּ מִידֵּי, הָא דְּלָא אִשְׁתְּיַיר בַּהּ מִידֵּי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Pappa said:** Both **this** ruling **and that** ruling are referring to **a basket and produce,** and nevertheless it is **not difficult: This** *baraita*, **where** the finder is obligated to proclaim his finding of the produce found outside the vessel, is referring to a case **where some** produce **remains in** the basket. **That** mishna, from which it is inferred that produce found outside the vessel belongs to the finder, is referring to a case **where no** produce **remains in** the basket.


###### Bava Metzia 25a:6
[Bava Metzia 25a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/25a:6)

וְאִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא: הָא וְהָא דְּלָא אִשְׁתְּיַיר בַּהּ מִידֵּי, וְלָא קַשְׁיָא: הָא דִּמְהַדְּרִי אַפֵּיהּ לְגַבֵּי פֵּירֵי, הָא דְּלָא מְהַדְּרִי אַפֵּיהּ לְגַבֵּי פֵּירֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if you wish, say** instead: Both **this** ruling **and that** ruling are referring to a case **where no** produce **remains in** the basket, **and** nevertheless it is **not difficult: This** *baraita*, where the finder is obligated to proclaim his finding of the produce found outside the empty vessel, is referring to a case **where** the **mouth** of the basket **is facing the produce,** indicating that the produce fell from it. **That** mishna, from which it is inferred that produce found outside the vessel belongs to the finder, is referring to a case **where** the **mouth** of the basket **is not facing the produce.**


###### Bava Metzia 25a:7
[Bava Metzia 25a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/25a:7)

וְאִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא: הָא וְהָא דִּמְהַדְּרִי אַפֵּיהּ לְגַבֵּי פֵּירֵי, וְלָא קַשְׁיָא: הָא דְּאִית לֵהּ אוּגְנִין לְצַנָּא, הָא דְּלֵית לֵהּ אוּגְנִין לְצַנָּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if you wish, say** instead: Both **this** ruling **and that** ruling are referring to a case **where** the **mouth** of the basket **is facing the produce,** and nevertheless, it is **not difficult: That** mishna, from which it is inferred that produce found outside the vessel belongs to the finder, is referring to a case **where** the empty **basket has a rim.** Had the produce fallen out of the basket, the rim would have prevented some of the produce from falling. **This** *baraita*, **where** the finder is obligated to proclaim the produce found outside the empty vessel, is referring to a case **where the basket has no rim** and therefore the produce in its entirety could have fallen from the basket.


###### Bava Metzia 25a:8
[Bava Metzia 25a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/25a:8)

צִבּוּרֵי פֵירוֹת וְצִבּוּרֵי מָעוֹת. שָׁמְעַתְּ מִינַּהּ מִנְיָן הָוֵי סִימָן, תְּנִי: ״צִבּוּר פֵּירוֹת״. שָׁמְעַתְּ מִינַּהּ מָקוֹם הָוֵי סִימָן, תְּנִי: ״צִבּוּרֵי פֵּירוֹת״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: And for these found items, one is obligated to proclaim his find: **Piles of produce and piles of coins. Conclude from it** that **number is a distinguishing mark,** and one reclaims his produce or coins by correctly declaring the number of piles. The Gemara rejects that proof. Perhaps one should **teach** the mishna as stating: **A pile of produce.** It is not the number of piles but their location that serves as a determining mark. Based on that emendation, **conclude from it** that **location is a distinguishing mark.** The Gemara rejects that proof as well. Perhaps one should **teach** the mishna as stating: **Piles of produce.** Since the authoritative version of the mishna is unclear, no proof can be cited from it.


###### Bava Metzia 25a:9
[Bava Metzia 25a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/25a:9)

שְׁלֹשָׁה מַטְבְּעוֹת זֶה עַל גַּב זֶה. אָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק מַגְדְּלָאָה: וְהוּא שֶׁעֲשׂוּיִין כְּמִגְדָּלִין. תַּנְיָא נָמֵי הָכִי: מָצָא מָעוֹת מְפוּזָּרוֹת – הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ שֶׁלּוֹ, עֲשׂוּיִין כְּמִגְדָּלִים – חַיָּיב לְהַכְרִיז. וְאֵלּוּ הֵן עֲשׂוּיִין כְּמִגְדָּלִים? שְׁלֹשָׁה מַטְבְּעִין זֶה עַל גַּב זֶה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: And for these found items, one is obligated to proclaim his find: **Three coins** stacked **one atop another. Rabbi Yitzḥak from Migdal says: And** one **is** obligated to proclaim the find in a case **where** the coins **are arranged in** well-ordered **towers. This is also taught** in a *baraita*: If one **found scattered coins, these** belong **to him.** If the coins **are arranged in** well-ordered **towers,** he is **obligated to proclaim** his find. The *baraita* elaborates: **And these** coins **are arranged in towers: Three coins** stacked **one atop another.**


###### Bava Metzia 25a:10
[Bava Metzia 25a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/25a:10)

הָא גּוּפַהּ קַשְׁיָא: אָמְרַתְּ מָצָא מָעוֹת מְפוּזָּרוֹת הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ שֶׁלּוֹ, הָא מְשַׁלְחֲפִי שַׁלְחוֹפֵי חַיָּיב לְהַכְרִיז! אֵימָא סֵיפָא: עֲשׂוּיִין כְּמִגְדָּלִין חַיָּיב לְהַכְרִיז, הָא מְשַׁלְחֲפִי שַׁלְחוֹפֵי הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ שֶׁלּוֹ! תָּנָא כֹּל שֶׁאֵין עֲשׂוּיִין כְּמִגְדָּלִין – מְפוּזָּרוֹת קָרֵי לְהוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara notes an apparent contradiction in the *baraita*. **This** *baraita* **itself is difficult.** In the first clause of the *baraita*, **you said:** If one **found scattered coins, these** belong **to him,** from which it can be inferred that **if** the coins **partially overlap [*meshalḥefei shalḥufei*],** he is **obligated to proclaim** his find. **Say the latter clause** of the *baraita*: If the coins **are arranged in** well-ordered **towers,** he is **obligated to proclaim** his find, from which it can be inferred that **if** the coins **partially overlap, those** coins **belong to him.** The Gemara answers: The ***tanna*** of the *baraita* **calls any** pile of coins **that is not arranged in** well-ordered **towers: Scattered.**


###### Bava Metzia 25a:11
[Bava Metzia 25a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/25a:11)

אָמַר רַבִּי חֲנִינָא: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא שֶׁל שְׁלֹשָׁה מְלָכִים, אֲבָל שֶׁל מֶלֶךְ אֶחָד אֵינוֹ חַיָּיב לְהַכְרִיז. הֵיכִי דָמֵי? אִי דַּעֲשׂוּיִין כְּמִגְדָּלִין – אֲפִילּוּ שֶׁל מֶלֶךְ אֶחָד נָמֵי, וְאִי דְּאֵין עֲשׂוּיִין כְּמִגְדָּלִין – אֲפִילּוּ שֶׁל שְׁלֹשָׁה מְלָכִים נָמֵי לָא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Ḥanina says:** The Sages **taught** that one must proclaim his find **only** when he finds coins minted **by three** different **kings, but** if all the coins were minted **by one king, one is not obligated to proclaim** his find. The Gemara asks: **What are the circumstances? If** the coins **are arranged in** well-ordered **towers,** then **even** if all the coins were minted **by one king,** the finder should **also** be obligated to proclaim his find. **And if** the coins **are not arranged in** well-ordered **towers,** then **even** if the **coins** were minted **by three kings,** the finder should **also not** be obligated to proclaim his find.


###### Bava Metzia 25a:12
[Bava Metzia 25a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/25a:12)

אֶלָּא אִי אִתְּמַר, הָכִי אִתְּמַר: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא שֶׁל מֶלֶךְ אֶחָד כְּעֵין שְׁלֹשָׁה מְלָכִים, אֲבָל שֶׁל מֶלֶךְ אֶחָד אֵינוֹ חַיָּיב לְהַכְרִיז. וְהֵיכִי דָּמֵי דַּעֲשׂוּיִין כְּמִגְדָּלִים? רְוִיחָא תַּתָּאָה וּמְצִיעָא עִילָּוֵיהּ וְזוּטָא עִילָּוֵיהּ מְצִיעָא. דְּאָמְרִינַן: אַנּוֹחֵי אַנְחִינְהוּ. אֲבָל שֶׁל מֶלֶךְ אֶחָד, דְּכוּלְּהוּ כִּי הֲדָדֵי נִינְהוּ אַף עַל גַּב דְּמַנְּחִי אַהֲדָדֵי – הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ שֶׁלּוֹ, אֵימַר: אִתְרְמוֹיֵי אִתְרְמִי וּבַהֲדֵי הֲדָדֵי נְפוּל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, if** Rabbi Ḥanina’s ruling **was stated, this** is how **it was stated:** The Sages **taught** that one must proclaim his find **only** when he finds coins of different sizes minted **by one king,** which are **similar to** coins minted by **three kings. But** if they are coins of the same size minted **by one king, he is not obligated to proclaim** his find. The Gemara elaborates: According to this interpretation, **what are the circumstances** of coins **that are arranged in** well-ordered **towers** and which one must proclaim? It is when **the bottom** coin is **broadest, and the intermediate-sized** coin is **atop it and the smallest** coin is **atop the intermediate** one, **as we say: They were placed** there and are not lost at all. **But** if one finds coins minted **by one king, each of them sized like the other, even if each is placed upon the other, those coins belong to** the finder. The reason is that it is possible to **say** that **it** is **happenstance and they fell together,** so their arrangement is not a distinguishing mark.


###### Bava Metzia 25a:13
[Bava Metzia 25a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/25a:13)

וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: אֲפִילּוּ שֶׁל מֶלֶךְ אֶחָד נָמֵי מַכְרֵיז. מַאי מַכְרֵיז? מִנְיָן. מַאי אִירְיָא תְּלָתָא? אֲפִילּוּ תְּרֵין נָמֵי. אָמַר רָבִינָא: טִבְעָא מַכְרֵיז.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Rabbi Yoḥanan says: Even** if the coins were minted **by one king,** one is **also** obligated to **proclaim** his find. The Gemara asks: **What** does one **proclaim** in order to invite the owner to describe his item? The Gemara answers: He proclaims that he found coins and the owner specifies the **number** of coins. The Gemara asks: If so, **why** does the mishna **specifically** teach a case where one found **three** coins when **even** if one found **two** coins they could be identified by their number? **Ravina said:** Since the finder **proclaims** that he found **coins,** using the plural term, indicating that there were at least two coins, if the owner claims that he lost two coins, the default of the plural term, he is not providing a distinguishing mark. Therefore, the mishna teaches a case of three coins.


###### Bava Metzia 25a:14
[Bava Metzia 25a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/25a:14)

בָּעֵי רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה: כְּשֵׁיר, מַהוּ? כְּשׁוּרָה, מַהוּ? כַּחֲצוּבָה, מַהוּ? כְּסוּלָּם, מַהוּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Yirmeya raises a dilemma:** If one found coins configured **like** a round **bracelet, what is** the *halakha*? If they were configured **like** a straight **line, what is** the *halakha*? If they were configured **like a triangle, what is** the *halakha*? If they were configured **like** a **ladder,** one partially upon the other and partially protruding, **what is** the *halakha*?


###### Bava Metzia 25a:15
[Bava Metzia 25a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/25a:15)

פְּשׁוֹט מֵהָא חֲדָא, דְּאָמַר רַב נַחְמָן אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר אֲבוּהּ: כֹּל שֶׁאִילּוּ מַכְנִיס לָהֶ[ן] קֵיסָם בֵּינֵיהֶן וְנוֹטְלָם בְּבַת אַחַת, חַיָּיב לְהַכְרִיז.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **Resolve at least one** of these dilemmas, **as Rav Naḥman says** that **Rabba bar Avuh says:** For **any** arrangement of coins such that **if one** were to **introduce a wood chip between** the coins he could thereby **lift them all at once** with that wood chip, he is **obligated to proclaim** his find. Based on that criterion, one can conclude that if one finds coins configured like a ladder, he is obligated to proclaim his find.


###### Bava Metzia 25a:16
[Bava Metzia 25a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/25a:16)

בָּעֵי רַב אָשֵׁי:

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Ashi raises a dilemma:**