Bava Metzia - Daf 23
- אין מעבירין על האוכלין, סימן הבא מאיליו
The Gemara suggests that סימן העשוי לידרס – a siman which is liable to be trampled, is a machlokes Tannaim. Rebbe Yehudah taught in the Mishnah: כל דבר שיש בו שינוי חייב להכריז – anything which has something unusual in it, such as a cake of pressed figs with a pottery shard inside, or a loaf with a coin inside, he is obligated to announce, implying the Tanna Kamma disagrees. The Gemara initially assumes they argue if a siman likely to be destroyed is a siman, but this is disproven. Rav Zevid says that Rava explains: everyone agrees that a siman likely to be trampled is still a siman (which is Rava’s opinion earlier), and everyone agrees מעבירין על האוכלין – one may pass by food on the ground without picking it up, making it likely that the siman will be destroyed. They argue if סימן הבא מאיליו – a siman which may have come about on its own, such as the above cases, is a legitimate siman (since the owner may be unaware of it). Rabbah agrees about the point of contention but maintains that everyone agrees a siman likely to be destroyed is not a siman (which is his opinion earlier). However, they also agree that אין מעבירין על האוכלין – one may not pass food on the ground without picking it up, so the siman is not likely to be destroyed.
- מנין is a siman
Rav Sheishess was asked: מנין הוי סימן או לא הוי סימן – is the number of items found together considered a siman, or is it not a siman? He responded that this can be resolved from a Baraisa, which teaches that if someone found silver vessels, copper vessels, broken pieces of lead, or any metal vessels, הרי זה לא יחזיר עד שיתן אות או עד שיכוין משקלותיו – he should not return them until the claimant gives a sign or accurately provides their weight. Rav Sheishess concludes: ומדמשקל הוי סימן – since a lost item’s weight is a legitimate siman, מדה ומנין נמי הוי סימן – its measurements or its number are also considered a legitimate siman.
- If מקום is a siman
Rav Bivi asked Rav Nachman: מקום הוי סימן או לא הוי סימן – is the place an object was lost considered a siman, or is it not considered a siman? He suggested to resolve the inquiry from a Baraisa which teaches that if one found kegs of wine, oil, or other goods, he may keep them. If an item’s place would be a valid siman, לכרוז מקום – let him announce the place where he found the items, and the owner can identify the items found!? Rav Zevid rejected the proof, saying that the Baraisa can be discussing kegs found ברקתא דנהרא – on the riverbank, where kegs are unloaded from boats. People who purchase several kegs would carry them away one at a time and may forget some. Rav Mari explained that such a place cannot serve as an identifying siman, because we tell the claimant: כי היכי דאתרמי לדידך – just as it happened to you, that you left your kegs on the riverbank, אתרמי נמי לחברך – it may have also happened to your fellow, who may have left the same goods there. In another version, Rav Mari said that even a specific location on a riverbank cannot serve as a siman, for the same reason.
