Talmud Shiur 5784 #12

1. These found objects belong to the finder
2. and these ones must be proclaimed [in the lost and found].
3. These found objects belong to the finder:
   1. if a man found scattered fruit,
      1. scattered money,
      2. small sheaves in the public domain,
      3. cakes of figs,
      4. bakers’ loaves,
      5. strings of fish,
      6. pieces of meat,
      7. wool shearings [as they come] from the country of origin,
      8. stalks of flax
      9. and strips of purple wool,
   2. These all belong to the finder,
      1. according to Rabbi Meir.
4. Rabbi Judah says:
   1. “Anything which has in it something unusual, must be proclaimed.
   2. How is this so?
      1. If he found a round cake with a potsherd in it or a loaf with coins in it [he must proclaim them].”
5. Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says:
   1. “New merchandise need not be proclaimed.”

Bundles of grain in a public area, these belong to him.

1. Rabba says: And even with regard to an item on which there is a distinguishing mark.
   1. Apparently, Rabba holds a distinguishing mark that is prone to be trampled is not a distinguishing mark.
2. Rava said: The Sages taught this halakha only with regard to an item on which there is no distinguishing mark, but with regard to an item on which there is a distinguishing mark, the one who finds it is obligated to proclaim his find.
   1. Apparently, Rava holds that a distinguishing mark that is prone to be trampled is a distinguishing mark.
3. And there are those who teach this halakha independent:
   1. A distinguishing mark that is prone to be trampled:
   2. Rabba says: It is not a distinguishing mark.
   3. And Rava says: It is a distinguishing mark.
4. We learned: If one finds bundles of grain in a public area, these belong to him; in a secluded area, the finder takes them and proclaims his find.
   1. What are the circumstances? If there is no distinguishing mark on the bundles, when one finds them in a secluded area, what does he proclaim?
   2. Rather, is it not a case where there is a distinguishing mark. And yet, it is taught that if he finds the bundles in a public area those belong to him. Apparently, a distinguishing mark that is prone to be trampled is not a distinguishing mark. This is a conclusive refutation of Rava.
5. Rava could have said to you: Actually, it is a case where there is no distinguishing mark on the bundles.
   1. And that which you said: In a secluded area, what does he proclaim? He proclaims that the owner should provide the location where he lost the bundles.
6. And Rabba said: The location is not a distinguishing mark.
   1. As it was stated: With regard to location, Rabba says: It is not a distinguishing mark, and Rava says: It is a distinguishing mark.

Prone to be trampled - That the place typically has people trampling on it, and the item is soft and easily trampled upon.

It is not a distingushing mark - That the owner is not relied upon to make a distinguishing mark, as he would say: the mark will be destroyed by the trampling of feet.

In a secluded area - Like a field that is being planted, in which not many people go through, but there are few who pass through it.

This is our version: If there is no distinguishing mark in a secluded area, what does he proclaim - That is to say, if he decrees that he found a lost object, what can he declare that would allow the loser to notify a mark?

He proclaims location - And doesn't proclaim the name of the lost item, only the name of the place: Whoever lost an object in such and such a place, come and say what they lost. And this one comes and says: I lost such and such an item there.