MISHNAH: Which finds are his and which ones does he have to make public¹? The following finds are his: If he found scattered produce, scattered coins², bundles of grain in the public domain³, or fig cakes, baker’s loaves, strings of fish, cuts of meat, local fleece-wool, bundles of flax, or strips of purple wool⁴; these are his⁵.

footnotes: ¹ As explained in Mishnah 6, there is a biblical requirement that the finder not return a found object unless the person claiming to be the owner clearly identifies the object by some marks or properties not generally known. Therefore, objects without identifying properties cannot be returned and become the finder’s immediately since it may be assumed that the owner immediately gave up hope of recovery, so that an ownerless object was picked up. ² If these are common produce or common coins, they have no identifying marks nor can they be identified by the place where they were lost. ³ Small bundles which are blown away by the wind or moved by passing animals or people; they cannot be expected to be found at the place where they were lost. Since most farmers make such bundles, their shape is no identifying mark. ⁴ All these are local products, made uniformly by several producers and, therefore, without individual identifying marks. ⁵ In the Babli and most independent Mishnah mss.: “The words of R. Meïr.” Since an anonymous Mishnah is supposed to be R. Meïr’s, the addition is unnecessary. The individual opinions expressed in the next Mishnah are clarifications, not dissenting opinions.

HALAKHAH: “Which finds are his,” etc. From where may an owner’s hopelessness⁶ be deduced from the Torah? Rebbi Joḥanan said in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Yehoṣadaq: “So you shall proceed with his donkey,⁷ 22:3: “So you shall proceed with his donkey, so you shall proceed with his garment, so you shall proceed with anything lost by your neighbor and which you found; you cannot avoid taking notice.” As usual, the argument is about a part of the verse which is not quoted. The clause in Italics seems to be superfluous; if he did not lose and you did not find, there would be no case. It must be that you found something which can be traced back to your neighbor.” etc. What is lost by him but may be found by anybody you have to make public. But what is not lost by him but may be found by anybody you do not have to make public. This excludes the owner’s hopelessness about that which was lost by him or anybody.

footnotes: ⁶ That a lost article becomes ownerless the moment the owner realizes his loss since he has no hope of recovery. Then appropriating a find which has no distinguishing marks is not theft. This leaves open the question, discussed at length in the Babli, why keeping a find without marks is not theft even before the original owner became conscious of his loss. ⁷ Deut.

It was stated⁸: “One who found bundles of grain in the public domain⁹ does not have to make it public; in a private domain¹⁰ he has to make it public¹¹. Sheaves¹² he has to make public, whether in the public or the private domain.”

footnotes: ⁸ Tosephta 2:5; Babli 22b. ⁹ Small bundles of standard size on the road leading from the fields to town. ¹⁰ On a field or a narrow path, not accessible to persons not engaged in agriculture at that place. ¹¹ In this situation, the bundle might not have been moved from the place and the place might count as identifying mark. ¹² Large sheaves for which size, kind, and place might count as identifying marks.

“Fig cakes.” That is, large cakes. But small cakes which come from Bostra¹³ he has to make public since they are typical for that place. Cuts of meat and among them a loaf¹⁴ or a kidney he has to make public. Strings of fish¹⁵ strung together with a vegetable or a whitefish¹⁵ he has to make public.

footnotes: ¹³ They are not locally made and may exhibit characteristics which distinguish them from other imported produce. ¹⁴ E reads כָּבֵד אֶחָד “a liver”. This seems to be a more reasonable text. Meat which is not a standard cut produced by every butcher has to be announced. ¹⁵ Routinely made by every fisherman when he brings his catch to market. ¹⁵ Routinely made by every fisherman when he brings his catch to market.

MISHNAH: Rebbi Jehudah says, anything out of the ordinary¹⁶ one has to make public. How is this? If he found a fig cake containing a potsherd, or a loaf containing coins. Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar said, merchandise of any kind¹⁷ one does not have to make public.

footnotes: ¹⁶ The deviation from the norm serves as identifying mark. ¹⁷ S. Lieberman, following B. Mussaphia, identifies as Greek ἐμπορία. If a new vessel is offered for trade and looks like any other new vessel of the same manufacture, no identification is possible. In the Tosephta, 2:1, R. Simeon ben Eleazar explicitly states that vessels which show signs of use must be advertised.

HALAKHAH: “Rebbi Jehudah says, anything out of the ordinary,” etc. It was stated: If it is embedded in it¹⁸. Here you say, if it is embedded in it. But there¹⁹ you say, if it lies on top of it. When you say, if it is embedded in it, in the public domain²⁰. When you say, if it lies on top of it, in a private domain. Maybe even in the public domain? If it lies on top of it, I am saying that if fell there.

footnotes: ¹⁸ Kneaded into the fig cake or baked into the loaf. ¹⁹ Tosefta 2:8: One who found a container and produce in front of it, a wallet and coins in front of it, must make it public. ²⁰ Where the place is not a distinguishing mark.

“Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar said, merchandise of any kind¹⁷ one does not have to make public.” Rebbi Joḥanan made this public and stated about it²¹: “The following are these. For example needle strips²², fire tongs²³, and strips of axes²⁴. The Amora of Rebbi Isaac bar Tevlai found a web rolled in a scarf²⁵ “loose garment, throw, scarf, etc.”. Arukh explains as “burnoose”. In Ashkenazic rabbinic Hebrew used for “coat”.. He came before Rebbi Isaac bar Tevlai who instructed him following Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar. The Amora of Rebbi Joḥanan found a web rolled in a scarf. He came before Rebbi Johanan who asked him, where did you find it? In an alley²⁶ A semi-private place, whose location might be a distinguishing mark and would have to be advertised., in a public square²⁷ Greek πλατεῖα. Here R. Simeon ben Eleazar’s rule applies.? For he wanted to free him following Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar.

footnotes: ¹⁷ S. Lieberman, following B. Mussaphia, identifies as Greek ἐμπορία. If a new vessel is offered for trade and looks like any other new vessel of the same manufacture, no identification is possible. In the Tosephta, 2:1, R. Simeon ben Eleazar explicitly states that vessels which show signs of use must be advertised. ²¹ Tosephta 2:1; Babli 24a. ²² Intact books of needles; an unused mass-produced article without individual marks. ²³ Where it is easy to see that they were never used. ²⁴ Since one only uses one axe at a time, these were never used. ²⁵ Latin amictorium ²⁶ Latin semita. ²⁷ Latin platea,

MISHNAH: But the following must be made public²⁸: If one found produce in a container or simply a container, coins in a wallet or simply a wallet, heaps of produce, heaps of coins²⁹, three coins one on top of the other³⁰, bundles of grain in a private domain³, home-baked loaves³¹, fleece wool taken from an artisan’s house³². Pitchers of wine and pitchers of oil he has to make public.

footnotes: ²⁸ Because there are distinguishing marks which the legitimate owner can identify if only the bare fact that such-and-such an item was found was made public. ²⁹ The amount and kind of the coins can be indicated. ³⁰ The particular way in which the coins were arranged is a distinguishing mark. ³ Small bundles which are blown away by the wind or moved by passing animals or people; they cannot be expected to be found at the place where they were lost. Since most farmers make such bundles, their shape is no identifying mark. ³¹ They have peculiar shapes which distinguish them from professionally produced loaves. ³² Showing signs of processing.

HALAKHAH: “But the following must be made public,” etc. Rav Jehudah says three coins of three kings³³. Rebbi Eleazar said, or even three from one king if they form a tower³⁴? Of three kings and they are in three towers? Or even three of one king as a tower³⁵.

footnotes: ³³ Three coins from three mints are certainly an identifying mark. In the Babli, 25a, this is a statement by the Galilean R. Ḥanina. ³⁴ If the loser can indicate both the kind of coin and the way they were arranged, he is identified as the owner. In the Babli, 25a, the only arrangement counted as identifying mark is that of a tower, the coins one on top of the other. ³⁵ This is the final answer. The claimant must identify either three different mintings or one kind of coin and the way they were arranged. Then it would be improbable that the arrangement was accidental.

“Pitchers of wine and pitchers of oil he has to make public.”³⁶ Rebbi Joḥanan said, if it was like a tripod³⁷ one does not have to make it public. What means, like a tripod? For example, a corral belonging to three people. Since one does not know to whom to return it, he does not have to make it public. Rebbi Yose³⁸ said, one understands from here that if a person went behind Rebbi Ḥalafta and a denar fell down from them, since one does not know to whom to return it, he does not have to make it public³⁹. Simeon bar Abba was walking behind Rebbi Eleazar; a denar fell down from him. Simeon bar Abba presented it to him. He answered, I already had given up hope about this. They said, Rebbi Eleazar only intended it for Rebbi Simeon bar Abba because he was poor⁴⁰.

footnotes: ³⁶ This quote from the Mishnah is out of place since one continues the discussion of single coins found. ³⁷ Three coins forming a regular triangle. This arrangement does not count as identifying mark.A corral is an enclosed space where nobody dwells permanently. If there are three tool sheds or three cow sheds in the corral, it may well be triangular. ³⁸ This clearly refers to R. Yose the Amora, not the Tanna ben Ḥalafta. The meaning of the mention of “R. Ḥalafta” in his statement is not clear. ³⁹ If there are no identifying marks and there is a doubt even between only two people, the find does not have to be returned. ⁴⁰ Since he refused to accept alms, R. Eleazar found a way to give him money in a way understood only by scholars

MISHNAH: If one found pigeon chicks bound together behind a temporary or permanent fence or on paths between fields⁴¹, he should not touch them⁴² 15:1), in the worst case the owner would lose his property and in the best he would be obligated to provide a distinguishing mark to regain his property.. If one found a vessel on garbage heaps, if it was covered he should not touch it⁴² 15:1), in the worst case the owner would lose his property and in the best he would be obligated to provide a distinguishing mark to regain his property., if in the open he should take it and make it public⁴³. What one found in a heap or an old wall⁴⁴ belongs to him. At a new wall⁴⁵, from the middle to the outside belongs to him, from the middle to the inside belongs to its owner. If he was renting out to others, even what is inside the house belongs to him⁴⁶.

footnotes: ⁴¹ Not easily accessible to the public. ⁴² One may not touch other people’s property which possibly was deposited somewhere, neither lost nor abandoned, since, as Maimonides writes (Gezelah wa‘bedah ⁴² One may not touch other people’s property which possibly was deposited somewhere, neither lost nor abandoned, since, as Maimonides writes (Gezelah wa‘bedah ⁴³ An intact vessel usually is not abandoned. ⁴⁴ A wall is old if it no longer shields anything. ⁴⁵ A stone wall built with niches. ⁴⁶ Anything left in a rental apartment after the renter moved out belongs to the landlord.

HALAKHAH: “If one found behind a temporary fence”, etc. Rav Jehudah said: Only pigeon chicks tied together at their wings⁴⁷. Rebbi Abba bar Zavda found a ring covered in a box⁴⁸ואם). and took it. He came and asked Rav, who told him, you did not act correctly. He said, shall I return it? He answered, no, for we might say that his owner came, looked for it, did not find it and gave up hope for it⁴⁹. c. Note 42), the finder keeps it. Ravad disagrees and holds that since the finder took it illegally, he cannot acquire but the object must lie untouched until the prophet Elijah comes and determines the owner. The last two opinions can be read into the Yerushalmi text which notes that the owner probably gave up hope of recovery and, therefore, could not regain the object even when the find was advertised..

footnotes: ⁴⁷ As the Babli explains, 25b, it was general usage to tie pigeon chicks together at their wings for transport, sale, etc. If these chicks were taken, no distinguishing marks otherwise were available and the owner could never get them back even if the find was advertised. ⁴⁸ E reads בחספה “with a potsherd”. L is confirmed by Tosaphot (25b s.v. ⁴⁹ The Babli, 25b, does not tell the story but quotes its result: R. Abba bar Zavda says in the name of Rav that “if possibly it was deposited, one should not take it, but if he took it, he should not return it.” In Rashi’s interpretation, one has to advertise the find. Following Maimonides (l

It was stated: What one found on a garbage heap he has to make public, for garbage is moved⁵⁰. What one found in a heap or an old wall⁴⁴ belongs to him, for I am saying that it belonged to the Emorites⁵¹. It was stated⁵²: If one found between planks⁵³, from the door and inside is like inside, from the door and outside is like outside. If it was opening to the inside, even from from the middle to the outside belongs to the owner of the property; if it was opening to the outside, even from the middle to the inside belongs to the finders.

footnotes: ⁵⁰ Also quoted in the Babli, 25b; Tosephta 2:11. S. Lieberman explains that, in contrast to the garbage heap in the public domain mentioned in the Mishnah, one speaks here of a private garbage heap which periodically is emptied into a landfill. Therefore, everything lying there is either abandoned or lost and must be taken and advertised. ⁴⁴ A wall is old if it no longer shields anything. ⁵¹ Tosephta 2:12. Archeological finds are ownerless and can be taken by the finder. ⁵² A similar, but not necessarily compatible, text is in Tosephta 2:13. ⁵³ A temporary fence made of wooden planks. The planks do not touch but are placed close enough to one another that no goat can pass between them. The problem is the status of the empty spaces between the planks.

“If he was renting out to others, even what is inside the house belongs to him.”⁵⁴ Rebbi Jeremiah says, they disagree about a hostelry⁵⁵, but in a courtyard everybody agrees that he is required to make it public. Rebbi Yose said, they disagree about a courtyard, but in a hostelry everybody agrees that it belongs to its finder.

footnotes: ⁵⁴ This quote is not really connected with the following, which refers to Tosephta 2:2, in which R. Simeon ben Eleazar states that “what is saved from the mouth of a lion or a wolf, from the surge of the ocean or a river, or found on a public thoroughfare, belongs to the finder since the owners had given up hope.” Since this is stated as an individual opinion, it follows that the anonymous majority require publication in all cases. ⁵⁵ Greek πανδοκεῖον, τό.

MISHNAH: What one found in a store is his⁵⁶. Between the counter and the storekeeper it is the storekeeper’s. Before the moneychanger it is his⁵⁶. Between the chair⁵⁷ and the moneychanger it is the moneychanger’s. If one bought produce from another person or another person sent him produce and he found coins in it, they are his⁵⁸. But if they were bundled⁵⁹, he takes them and makes it public. The garment⁶⁰ 22:3: “So you shall treat his donkey, so you shall treat his garment, so you shall treat anything lost by your fellow man, which is lost by him but you found it; you are not allowed to disregard it.” was subsumed under “anything”; why was it mentioned separately? To bracket with it and tell you, just as a garment is special in that it has distinguishing marks and claimants, so about everything which has distinguishing marks and claimants you have to give public notice⁶¹ 224. This justifies the arguments in Halakhah 4 that even if there are distinguishing marks, one does not have to advertise if there are no claimants..

footnotes: ⁵⁶ Because most probably one of the previous customers lost the money which by its nature has no distinguishing marks. ⁵⁶ Because most probably one of the previous customers lost the money which by its nature has no distinguishing marks. ⁵⁷ Where the customer sits who has his money exchanged. ⁵⁸ The coins probably were lost by a person engaged in harvest or transport, not the seller of the produce. ⁵⁹ Where the number of coins, their value, and the way they were tied together are distinguishing marks. ⁶⁰ Deut. ⁶¹ Sifry Deut.

HALAKHAH: “What one found in a store is his,” etc. Rebbi Eleazar said, so is the Mishnah: On his chair, on his counter⁶² that they are the storekeeper’s or the banker’s..

footnotes: ⁶² The Babli, 26b, in the name of R. Eleazar infers from the Mishnah that forgotten coins on the counter of store or bank are the finder’s. The language of the Yerushalmi rather points to the opposite conclusion, viz.,

⁶³ 3(5). Simeon ben Shetaḥ⁶⁴ was working with linen. His students said to him, Rabbi, in order to make it easier for you we want to buy a donkey, then you will not have to work so hard. They went and bought a donkey from a Saracen; a pearl was hanging on its neck. They came to him saying, because of this you will not have to work anymore. He said to them, why? They told him, we bought for you a donkey from a Saracen and a pearl is hanging on its neck. He asked them, does its owner know about this? They answered, no. He told them, go and return it. But did not Rav Huna, Bevay bar Gozlan, in the name of Rav say, they objected before Rebbi: Even according to him who says that an object robbed from a Gentile is forbidden, everybody agrees that what he lost is permitted⁶⁵ 113b.. Do you think that Simeon ben Shetaḥ was a barbarian⁶⁶? Simeon ben Shetaḥ wanted to hear: Praised be the God of the Jews, more than any gain in this world.

footnotes: ⁶³ An abbreviated Hebrew version of this story is in Deut. rabba ⁶⁴ The head of the Synhedrion in Alexander Yannai’s time. ⁶⁵ Bava qama ⁶⁶ Greek βάρβαρος, “barbarous, foreign”.

The following implies the same. Rebbi Ḥanina reports the following case: The elder rabbis bought a heap of wheat from the household of the general and found in it a bundle of denars. They returned it to them. They said, praised be the God of the Jews.

Abba Oshaia from Tireh [was a washer. The queen came to bathe in a water pond. She lost her בינדילנין⁶⁸; he found it. When she left, he handed it to her.]⁶⁹ but already noted in the 17th Cent. by R. Menaḥem di Lonzano in his textual notes on the Yerushalmi. She said, this is for you; it is not important for me and I have more of this. He told her, the Torah decided that we have to return it. She said, praised be the God of the Jews.

footnotes: ⁶⁸ Lieberman suggests Greek δεράνιον, Byzantine δεράιον “necklace”. ⁶⁹ From E, missing in L and editio princeps,

Rebbi Samuel bar Sosarṭai went to Rome. The queen had lost her דילניה but he found it. A herold went through the city: One who will return it within 30 days will receive such and such; after 30 days his head will be lifted from him. He did not return it within 30 days. After 30 days he returned it. She asked him, had you not been in the city? He answered, yes. She asked him, had you not heard the voice of the herold? He answered, yes. She asked him, what did he say? He answered, one who will return it within 30 days will receive such and such; after 30 days his head will be lifted from him. She asked him, why did you not return it within 30 days? He answered, one should not say that I acted out of fear of you, but out of fear of the Merciful. She said to him, praised be the God of the Jews.

⁷⁰ 33(1), Lev. rabba27(1). Alexander the Macedonian went to the king of Cassia⁷¹. He saw that he had much gold, much silver. He told him, I do not need your gold nor your silver; I came only so see your practice⁷², how you are dealing, how you are judging. While he was still discussing with him, there came a man having a dispute with another, for he bought (a plot, entered it) [a garbage heap, dug in it]⁷³ and found a treasure trove of denars. The buyer said, I bought a garbage heap, I did not buy a treasure. The seller said, I sold a garbage heap and all it contains. While they still were arguing with one another, the king asked one of them, do you have a male son? He answered, yes. He asked the other one, do you have a female daughter? He answered, yes. He told them, marry them to each other and the treasure should belong to both. He⁷⁴ started to laugh. He⁷⁵ asked him, why are you laughing? Did I not judge correctly? He asked him, if the case came before you, how would you have judged? He⁷⁴ told him, one kills both of them and the treasure falls to the king. He⁷⁵ told him, do you love gold so much? He⁷⁵ made him a meal and brought before him golden meat, golden chicken. He⁷⁴ asked him, can I eat gold? He⁷⁵ told him, the spirit of this person should be wiped out. You cannot eat gold, why do you love gold so much? He⁷⁵ asked him, does the sun shine upon you? He⁷⁴ answered, yes. Does rain fall on you? He⁷⁴ answered, yes. He⁷⁵ asked him, do you have small animals? He⁷⁴ answered, yes. The spirit of this person should be wiped out; you live only by the merit of the small animals, as it is written⁷⁶ 36:7.: “Man and animal You are saving, o Eternal!”

footnotes: ⁷⁰ Parallel versions of this story are in Gen. rabba ⁷¹ In the Midrashim: Behind the Mountains of Darkness. ⁷² Greek πρᾶξις. ⁷³ The text in parentheses is the L text, the one in brackets is the text of E and the Midrashim. The sequel shows that the latter text is original. ⁷⁴ Alexander. ⁷⁵ The savage king. ⁷⁴ Alexander. ⁷⁵ The savage king. ⁷⁵ The savage king. ⁷⁴ Alexander. ⁷⁵ The savage king. ⁷⁵ The savage king. ⁷⁴ Alexander. ⁷⁴ Alexander. ⁷⁵ The savage king. ⁷⁴ Alexander. ⁷⁶ Ps.

MISHNAH: How long does one have to make it public⁷⁷. Until his neighbors know, the words of Rebbi Meïr. Rebbi Jehudah says, three holidays, and after the last holiday seven days so that one goes home during three days, comes back during three days, and makes it public for one day⁷⁸.

footnotes: ⁷⁷ To actively seek out the owner. ⁷⁸ Presuming that every person who made the pilgrimage to Jerusalem publicly declare there his finds (at the “stone of claimants”, Babli 28b) so that everybody hear all declarations and can inform his neighbors about the objects found. The person who lost an advertised object then can go to Jerusalem.

HALAKHAH: “How long does one have to make it public,” etc. It was stated⁷⁹: In earlier times one made it public during three holidays, and after the last holiday seven days so that one goes home during three days, comes back during three days, and makes it public during one day. After the destruction of the Temple they instituted that one has to make it public during three days⁸⁰ has to give notice in the synagogue.” A similar notice is implied by Halakhah 8.. Starting from the danger⁸¹ they instituted that one has to inform his relatives and neighbors⁸²; this is sufficient.

footnotes: ⁷⁹ Tosephta 2:17; a different version in the Babli 28b. ⁸⁰ In the Tosephta, 30 days. In the Babli, “one has to give notice in the synagogues and houses of study”, no time limit given. In one Babli ms: “One only ⁸¹ Hadrian’s persecutions when all synagogues were closed and religious assemblies were forbidden (S. Lieberman). ⁸² In the Tosephta and some Babli texts, “his relatives, neighbors, and acquaintances.”

MISHNAH: If one described the lost object but not its identifying marks, he⁸³ should not deliver. To the swindler one should not deliver even if he describes its identifying marks, since it is said: “Until investigating your brother about it,⁸⁴ 22:2; Sifry Deut. 223.” until you investigate your brother whether he be a swindler or no swindler.

footnotes: ⁸³ The finder may deliver only after satisfying himself that the claimant is the legal owner. ⁸⁴ Deut.

HALAKHAH: “If one described the lost object,” etc. What is a swindler? He shows himself as one who returns finds and uses this for a big coup. How does he make a big coup? He shows himself to people as one who returns finds so they will give him valuables in trust. He takes all of them and disappears. But some say, he goes to one synagogue and hears about distinguishing marks; then he goes to another synagogue, describes the indentifying marks and takes [the finds] away.

MISHNAH: Anything which works and eats⁸⁵ shall work and eat⁸⁶. What does not work but eats⁸⁷ should be sold because it is said⁸⁴ 22:2; Sifry Deut. 223., “and return it to him,” plan to return it to him⁸⁸. What happens with the money? Rebbi Tarphon says, he may use it; therefore if it is lost he is liable for its alienation. Rebbi Aqiba says, he may not use it; therefore if it is lost he is not liable for its alienation.

footnotes: ⁸⁵ E. g., cattle or donkeys. ⁸⁶ While the finder waits for the owner to claim his animal. ⁸⁷ Any other kind of animal. ⁸⁴ Deut. ⁸⁸ The find has to be kept in such a way that it can be returned without presenting to its owner a bill for expenses during the waiting period.

HALAKHAH: “Anything which works and eats,” etc. It was stated: There should not be given food in the value of a calf to calves, a foal to foals, or a chicken to chickens⁸⁹. It happened that a man found five calves; he was selling and feeding until only one was left. Rav Jehudah in the name of Rav: Practice follows Rebbi Tarphon⁹⁰ about objects with distinguishing marks⁹¹. Rebbi Abba and Rav Jehudah in the name of Rav: It happened that Rebbi instructed following Rebbi Tarphon in a case about objects with distinguishing marks. Rav Jehudah said, a scholar does not have to indicate a distinguishing mark. Rav Huna said, everybody⁹² agrees that if it was a bundle of coins he may not touch them⁹³.

footnotes: ⁸⁹ The Yerushalmi sets no time limit on how long the finder has to care for animals he found. Tosefta (2:20) and Babli (28b) give different limits. The statement here in contrast notes that by the time the bill for the food of an animal in a herd approaches the cost of one animal, the finder should sell the herd (under the supervision of the court, in order to escape financial responsibilities.) ⁹⁰ In the Babli, 29b, Rav Jehudah in the name of Samuel. ⁹¹ Objects without distinguishing marks immediately become the finder’s property. ⁹² Even R. Aqiba. ⁹³ Babli 29b.

The great Jehudah went to the synagogue. He took off his sandals and they disappeared. He said, if I had not gone to the synagogue, my sandals would not have disappeard⁹⁴. Rebbi Yose was sitting and teaching when a dead body was brought in. He did not say anything either to those who got up or to those who remained sitting⁹⁵ 3:1; Nazir 7:1 Note 34. It has no relevance for the topics discussed here..

footnotes: ⁹⁴ He followed the oriental usage not to enter a synagogue with his shoes on his feet. The story belongs to Halakhah 8; it shows that swindlers (or in this case, thieves) are found even in a synagogue or among scholars. ⁹⁵ A reformulation of a text in Berakhot

MISHNAH: One who found book-scrolls reads in them once every thirty days; if he is illiterate, he rolls them up⁹⁶. But he should not study a new subject in them, nor should a second person read with him⁹⁷. One who found a garment shakes it out every thirty days; he spreads it out for its conservation, but not to show off⁹⁸. Silver and brass vessels he uses for their preservation, but not to rub off⁹⁹. Gold and glass vessels he should not touch until the prophet Elijah comes¹⁰⁰. If one found a sack or a chest or anything which he does not take up, he need not take it¹⁰¹.

footnotes: ⁹⁶ The rules of the Mishnah are based on the finder’s biblical obligation to keep the find in as good condition as possible (cf. Note 88). Leather or parchment scrolls deteriorate if they are not rolled up for a long time. ⁹⁷ Intensive use is apt to damage the scroll. ⁹⁸ Displaying a garment which is too expensive for his means in order to enhance one’s credit standing is illegitimate use of another person’s property. ⁹⁹ These vessels get tarnished if they are not used. But they cannot be used in a way which would require heavy rubbing for cleansing since this would diminish their weight. ¹⁰⁰ Cf. Note 49. ¹⁰¹ If his social standing would be impaired if he was seen carrying something that in normal circumstances is carried only by servants, he may disregard the biblical commandment to take up the find.

HALAKHAH: “One who found book-scrolls,” etc. It was stated¹⁰²; partial parallel in Sifry Deut. 224.: “One who found book-scrolls reads in them once every thirty days; if he is illiterate he rolls them up. He should not read a paragraph and repeat it, nor should he read a paragraph and translate it¹⁰³, nor should he open more than three pages¹⁰⁴, nor should three persons read from the same tome. When has this been said? For new ones¹⁰⁵. But for old ones twelve months. Silver vessels he may use cold but not hot because it blackens them¹⁰⁶. Brass vessels he may use hot but not on the fire because it diminishes them. Rakes and axes he may use on soft material but not on hard. With a rake he may receive mortar, wash it, and put it back in its place. With an ax he may split wood¹⁰⁷, but not stone-palm or olive wood. What has been said about a find is valid equally for deposits. If one deposits a garment with another person, he has to shake it out once every thirty days. If it is much work, he can collect his expenses¹⁰⁸ from it.

footnotes: ¹⁰² Tosephta 2:21–22; in the Babli 29b–30a a series of baraitot ¹⁰³ If it is a Torah scroll, it may not be used to prepare either for the reading or the Aramaic translation in the synagogue. ¹⁰⁴ To avoid tearing the scroll inadvertently. ¹⁰⁵ Whose leather or parchment is stiff and there is a danger lest it break if not moved from time to time. ¹⁰⁶ They become tarnished. ¹⁰⁷ Soft wood, not hardwood. ¹⁰⁸ Such as hiring help to take care of the garment.

MISHNAH: What is a lost animal¹⁰⁹ 22:1 and Ex. 23:4 which state the duty to return straying animals to their owners.? If he found a donkey or a cow grazing on the road¹¹⁰, this is no lost animal. A donkey whose gear is upside-down or a cow running in a vineyard are lost animals. If he returned it but it ran away, returned it but it ran away even four or five times, he is obligated to return it since it is said¹¹¹ 22:1. The infinitive construction is regularly interpreted as implying repetition; cf. Sifry Deut. 222.: “Return it returning.” If he was losing time worth a tetradrachma¹¹², he cannot say, give me a tetradrachma but [the owner] may pay him at the rate of an unemployed worker. If there is a court¹¹³ court composed of three of the finder’s acquaintances who can empower him to charge full compensation for his time. Since the Yerushalmi does not discuss the Mishnah, its position cannot be ascertained., he can stipulate with him¹¹⁴) in his commentary to Alfasi points out that the word makes no sense since the finder’s obligation already has terminated if the animal’s owner is around. before the court. If there is no court, before whom could he stipulate? His own comes first¹¹⁵ 22:1.. ¹¹⁶ If one found it in the cow-shed, he has no obligation; in the public domain he is obligated. But if it was between graves, he¹¹⁷ may not defile himself. If his father told him to defile himself, or told him not to return it, he should not listen to him¹¹⁸ Chapter 20; ed. Horovitz-Rabin p. 325.). ¹¹⁹ 23:5. If he unloaded and loaded, unloaded and loaded even four or five times, he is obligated since it is said: “restoring restore”¹²⁰ 23:5; in rabbinic interpretation, the root here is עזב II. Ibn Ezra in both his commentaries ad loc. calls this “far fetched”. Onqelos, Pseudo-Jonathan, and Saadia translate as if it were written twice, first עזב I “abandon”, then עזב II “put in good order.” This may be a pun intended in the biblical text.. If he¹²¹ sat down and said, since it is your¹²² p. 215. religious obligation, if you want to unload, unload, he¹²² p. 215. is free since it is said: “with him”. It is a religious obligation to unload, but not to load; Rebbi Simeon says, also to load¹²³22:4: “uplifting you shall uplift with him.” Mekhilta dR. Ismael, Neziqin 20 (p. 326); Sifry Deut. 225.. Rebbi Yose the Galilean said, if the load was more than the ordinary, he need not do anything since it is said: “under its load,” a load which it can carry¹²⁴ 20 (p. 325)..

footnotes: ¹⁰⁹ The Mishnah refers to Deut. ¹¹⁰ Even if no person was near watching the animal. ¹¹¹ Deut. ¹¹² If the person finding the animal is highly paid and his time is worth much more than that of an agricultural hired hand, the question arises whether he can be forced to miss his lucrative trade in order to return a stray animal. ¹¹³ According to Rashi, this may be an ad hoc ¹¹⁴ This word is also in Alfasi’s text but only in one ms. of the Babli. R. Yosef Ḥabiba (Nimmuqe Yosef ¹¹⁵ There is no obligation to incur monetary loss in following Deut. ¹¹⁶ This is a continuation of Mishnah 11. On the owner’s property, no animal is staying. ¹¹⁷ If the possible helper was a Cohen. ¹¹⁸ Since both son and father are required to follow God’s commandments, if the father commands not to obey God, he must be disobeyed (Mekhilta dR. Ismael, Neziqin ¹¹⁹ Here begins the rabbinic interpretation of Ex. ¹²⁰ Ex. ¹²¹ The owner of a animal which stumbled. ¹²² The person who comes to help. Mekhilta dR. Simeon ben Iohai, ¹²² The person who comes to help. Mekhilta dR. Simeon ben Iohai, ¹²³ Implied by the parallel Deut. ¹²⁴ Mekhilta dR. Ismael, Neziqin

HALAKHAH: “What is a lost animal,” etc. “If one found it in the cowshed, he has no obligation; in the public domain he is obligated. Between graves, he may not defile himself. If his father told him to defile himself, or told him not to return it, he should not listen to him.” Everywhere you say that a positive commandment has precedence over a prohibition, but here, you say that a positive commandment does not have precedence over a prohibition¹²⁵? There is a difference since both he and his father are required to honor the Omnipresent¹ Chapter 20; ed. Horovitz-Rabin p. 325.)¹²⁶ 19:3..

footnotes: ¹²⁵ The positive commandment is to honor father and mother, to fear mother and father. The obligation to help with a fallen animal is formulated as a prohibition: one is forbidden to be oblivious of the animal’s pain; the Cohen is forbidden to enter a cemetary. Therefore, why should the father’s command not be obeyed in preference to obeying biblical prohibitions. ¹ Since both son and father are required to follow God’s commandments, if the father commands not to obey God, he must be disobeyed (Mekhilta dR. Ismael, Neziqin ¹²⁶ In the Babli, 32a, this is explained as direct obligation formulated in Lev.

It was stated: “Lying down” but not one which habitually lies down¹²⁷ 20 (p. 325); Babli 33a. It has been noted by modern Bible commentators that רבץ (Accadic rabaṣu, Arabic ربض) describes an animal resting comfortably on its knees and that, therefore, Ex. 23:5 is an exhortation not to be a busybody offering help when it is not needed, whereas Deut. 22:4 is the obligation to help where it is needed. The problem with this interpretation is that it does not fit the general context of the Chapter in Ex. Therefore, the rabbinic interpretation is preferable which essentially treats all words in Ex. 23:5 as ambiguous.. But then it was stated: “He unloads with him even a hundred times¹ in a day.” When you said, “lying down” rather than one which habitually lies down, about one which lies down by himself. When you said, “he unloads with him even a hundred times,” in an accident.

footnotes: ¹²⁷ Mekhilta dR. Ismael, Neziqin ¹ Tosephta 2:24.

¹²⁸ 20 p. 323, dR. Simeon bar Ioḥai p. 215, Sifry Deut. 222, Midrash Tannaїm (Midrash Haggadol) 22:4.“if you hit upon.¹²⁹ 23:5.” I could think, really if you hit upon him; the verse says, “if you see.¹³⁰ 22:4.” Concerning “if you see,” I could think even at a distance of a hundred¹³¹”, which for practical purposes is as impossible as 100 mil. mil? The verse says, “if you hit upon.” How is this? The Sages estimated one in 7 1/2 of a mil, i. e., a stadion¹³¹”, which for practical purposes is as impossible as 100 mil.. ¹²⁸ 20 p. 323, dR. Simeon bar Ioḥai p. 215, Sifry Deut. 222, Midrash Tannaїm (Midrash Haggadol) 22:4. Putting in order you shall put in order,¹²⁹ 23:5.” this is unloading. “Uplifting you shall uplift,¹³⁰ 22:4.” this is loading. Rebbi Simeon ben Ioḥai says, just as his unloading is [an obligation] from the Torah, so his loading is from the Torah¹³³. ¹³⁴ If the donkey was a Jew’s but the load a Gentile’s, everybody says that he unloads and loads. If the donkey was a Gentile’s but the load a Jew’s, according to the Sages one neither unloads nor loads. According to Rebbi Simeon one unloads but does not load.

footnotes: ¹²⁸ Babli 32a; Mekhilta dR. Ismael Neziqin ¹²⁹ Ex. ¹³⁰ Deut. ¹³¹ E has מלוא מיל “a full mil ¹³¹ E has מלוא מיל “a full mil ¹²⁸ Babli 32a; Mekhilta dR. Ismael Neziqin ¹²⁹ Ex. ¹³⁰ Deut. ¹³³ Whereas for the Sages he may ask to be paid for helping in loading; cf. Note 134. ¹³⁴ Babli 32b; other sources cf. Note 128.

MISHNAH: ¹³⁵ 3:7, 48b (cf. also end of Mishnah Keritut6:9, Tosephta Horaiot 2:5,6). Between his lost property and his father’s lost property, his own has precedence. Between his lost property and his teacher’s lost property, his own has precedence. Between his father’s lost property and his teacher’s lost property, his teacher’s lost property has precedence, for his father brought him to the life of this world, but his teacher who taught him wisdom brought him to the life of the future world. But if his father was his teacher’s equal, his father’s lost property has precedence. If his father and his teacher were carrying loads, he unloads his teacher’s and after that his father’s. If his father and his teacher were jailed, he redeems his teacher and after that redeems his father; but if his father was learned he redeems his father and after that redeems his teacher.

footnotes: ¹³⁵ Mishnah and Halakhah are treated more thoroughly in Horaiot

HALAKHAH: “Between his lost property and his father’s lost property,” etc. It was stated¹³⁶ 2:5. {The latter text is not in the Yerushalmi appended to the editio princeps of the Babli.}: “Who is his teacher who taught him wisdom? The one who taught him first¹³⁷, the words of Rebbi Meïr. Rebbi Jehudah says, the one from whom he received most of his instruction. Rebbi Yose said, anyone who explained a Mishnah to him.” Rav followed Rebbi Meïr, Rebbi Joḥanan Rebbi Jehudah, and Samuel Rebbi Yose.

footnotes: ¹³⁶ A different version in the Babli 33a, Tosephta 2:30, Horaiot ¹³⁷ The elementary school teacher who taught him reading and writing.

Rav followed Rebbi Meïr. A person was Rav’s first teacher. He heard that he had died and tore his garment for him.

Rebbi Joḥanan followed Rebbi Jehudah. Rebbi Joḥanan was climbing from Tiberias to Sepphoris when he saw a man descending from there. He asked him, what is new in the big city? He told him, one of the great rabbis died and everbody was running to occupy themselves with him¹³⁸. Rebbi Joḥanan understood that it was Rebbi Ḥanina. He sent and brought his good Sabbath clothes and tore them¹³⁹ 25a, “13 silk stolas.”. But did we not state: Any tear which is not in panic is not a tear¹⁴⁰ 25a, the statement is amoraic, attributed to Samuel.? Rebbi Joḥanan wanted to do more and show his appreciation. But we do not know whether it was because he was his teacher or because of bad news. There is the case of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba in Sepphoris¹⁴¹ text: “R. Ḥananiah (read: R. Ḥanina) was leaning on R. Ḥiyya bar Abba in Sepphoris.”. He saw that everybody was running. He asked, why is everybody running? They told him, Rebbi Joḥanan is preaching in Rebbi Banaia’s study house and everybody is running to hear him. He said, praised be the Merciful Who showed me people running while I am alive. In Agadah I explained him everything except Proverbs and Ecclesiastes¹⁴². This means every single student¹⁴³.

footnotes: ¹³⁸ For the burial. ¹³⁹ In the Babli, Mo‘ed Qaṭan ¹⁴⁰ Since really it is forbidden to destroy usable things, tearing one’s clothes in mourning is acceptable only as an expression of acute pain. How could R. Joḥanan make an elaborate ceremony out of it? In the Babli, Mo‘ed Qaṭan ¹⁴¹ This sentence seems to be incomplete. In the Horaiot ¹⁴² This proves that R. Ḥanina was a teacher of R. Joḥanan, even though in legal matters R. Joḥanan was the student of R. Hoshaia. ¹⁴³ Even if he is a student only in homiletics.

Samuel followed Rebbi Yose. A person explained to Samuel: “Two keys, for one he has to go down to his arm-pit and one opens straight;¹⁴⁴ 3:6. The doors of the Temple hall could be opened only from the inside. When the door was locked, a Cohen entered from a small side door which led to a guard room. The lock of this side door was hidden; the Cohen had to take the key, reach with his entire arm, up to his arm-pit, behind the partition wall and then insert the key. The second door, from the guard room into the Temple hall, could then be opened by a regular key inserted straight into the keyhole.” that he lowered his hand under his arm-pit until he could insert the key straight. He heard that this one had died and tore his garment for him¹⁴⁵: He removed his phylacteries as s sign of mourning..

footnotes: ¹⁴⁴ Mishnah Tamid ¹⁴⁵ In Horaiot