Previous daf

1)

(a) What does the Tana of our Mishnah say about someone who finds 'scattered fruit (referring to grain), scattered money, small sheaves in the Reshus-ha'Rabim or rings of dried figs'?

(b) What is the significance of the fact that he found the small sheaves in the Reshus-ha'Rabim?

(c) What do the above, as well as someone who finds 'bakers' loaves, strings of fish, cuts of meat, unprocessed shearings of wool, thin threads of flax or combed 'tongues' of wool' have in common? Why does the Tana permit the finder to keep them?

(d) Rebbi Yehudah obligates the finder to return anything which has a Shinuy.
What does he mean by that?

(a) What does Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar say about 'K'lei Anpuri'ah' (which will be explained later)?

(b) How does Rebbi Yitzchak qualify 'scattered fruit' in our Mishnah?

(c) According to Rebbi Yitzchak, why can our Mishnah not be speaking about fruit that had obviously ...

1. ... fallen unbeknown to the owner?
2. ... been placed deliberately?

(d) So how does Rav Ukva bar Chama establish our Mishnah?

(a) What is the underlying reason for this distinction? Why, if the fruit was scattered in a space of less than four Amos, would the finder be obligated to return it?

(b) Rebbi Yirmiyah asks a number of She'eilos based on this distinction. Why, in spite of the fact that ...

1. ... half a Kav in two Amos entails less trouble to pick up than one Kav in four Amos, might the finder nevertheless be permitted to keep it?
2. ... two Kabin in eight Amos is more valuable than one Kav in four Amos, might the finder nevertheless be permitted to keep it?

(c) Sesame-seeds are even more trouble to gather than grain.
Why then, might one nevertheless be obligated to return a Kav of them that one finds in the granary scattered in four Amos?

(d) And why might one then be obligated to return a Kav of dates or pomegranates scattered in four Amos, even though they are less valuable than grain?

(e) What is the outcome of all these She'eilos?

4)

(a) Abaye holds 'Yi'ush she'Lo mi'Da'as Lo Havi Yi'ush'.
What does he mean?

(b) What does Rava say?

(c) Why, even in a case where the owner was not aware of the loss until after the finder found it, will ...

1. ... Rava concede that if the lost article has a Si'man, 'Lo Havi Yi'ush'?
2. ... Abaye concede in a case where the incoming tide or an overflowing river swept away the lost article, that 'Havi Yi'ush'?

(d) Then in which case do they argue?

(a) If Abaye goes after the time of Yi'ush, what is Rava's reason?

(b) How do we reconcile Abaye with our Mishnah, which permits the finder to keep ...

1. ... scattered fruit?
2. ... scattered money?
3. ... rings of dried figs and bakers' loaves?
4. ... 'tongues' of purple wool?

(c) What does the Beraisa say about someone who finds money in a Shul, in a Beis ha'Medrash or in any public place that is frequented by large numbers of people?

(d) How does Rebbi Yitzchak explain this Beraisa, to answer the Kashya on Abaye from Yi'ush she'Lo mi'Da'as?

(a) Another Beraisa permits anyone to take Leket once the Nemushos have been and gone. According to Rebbi Yochanan, the 'Nemushos' are old men who walk on sticks.
What does Resh Lakish say?

(b) What is the Tana's reason for this ruling (according to both Rebbi Yochanan and Resh Lakish)?

(c) Seeing as the poor people who live in other towns do not know when the Nemushos have been, why is this not a Kashya on Abaye? Why is it not a question of Yi'ush she'Lo mi'Da'as?

(a) What are 'Ketzi'os'?

(b) What does the Mishnah in Ma'asros say about Ketzi'os that one finds in the street or beside a field, with regard to ...

1. ... Gezel?
2. ... Ma'asros?

(c) And what does the Tana there say about ...

1. ... figs that one finds underneath a fig-tree?
2. ... olives and carobs that one finds underneath their respective trees?

(a) What might we ask on Abaye from the Reisha of the Beraisa?

(b) So how will Abaye explain the Tana's concession of ...

1. ... Ketzi'os?
2. ... figs under a fig-tree?

(c) And how will Rava explain the Seifa, where the Tana forbids the olives and the carabs that have fallen off the tree.
Is that not because it is Yi'ush she'Lo mi'Da'as?

(d) Then why can the finder take the figs that he finds under the fig-tree?

(a) What does the Beraisa say about a Ganav, a Gazlan and the River Yarden that took away objects from one person and deposited them by another?

(b) Why does the Tana mention specifically the River Yarden? Might the Din differ in the case of another river?

(a) There is nothing to ask on Abaye from the cases of Gazlan and the River Yarden.
Why not?

(b) The case of Ganav however, whom the owner does not see, and which is therefore a question of Yi'ush she'Lo mi'Da'as, indicates that the Tana holds 'Havi Yi'ush'.
How does Rav Papa establish the Beraisa, in order to reconcile the Beraisa with Abaye?

(c) But surely an armed robber is also a Gazlan?

Next daf