Bava Metzia - Daf 24
- Returning new articles to a Torah scholar with טביעות עינא
In the Mishnah, Rebbe Shimon ben Elazar said that "אנפוריא" vessels do not need to be announced, meaning new vessels to which the eye has not yet become accustomed. Even without a siman, lost items are returned to a Torah scholar בטביעות עינא – through his visual recognition, which only applies if he has owned them for enough time to have become familiar with them. This ruling is supported by Shmuel, who said the Rabbis only deviate from the truth in three matters: במסכת – regarding knowing a mesechta, which he can untruthfully deny out of modesty, - ובפוריא – regarding “the bed” (i.e., if he was asked if he had relations, he may untruthfully deny for the purpose of decency), ובאושפיזא – and regarding hospitality (i.e., he can untruthfully understate his host’s generosity, so he will not be inundated with unwanted guests). Mar Zutra explained the practical import of Shmuel’s statement: לאהדורי ליה אבידתא בטביעות עינא – to return a lost item to [a Torah scholar] through visual recognition, which is only if he does not deviate from the truth for any other matters.
- מקום שהרבים מצויין שם, רוב ישראל vs. רוב נכרים
In a Baraisa, Rebbe Shimon ben Elazar said: המוצא בסרטיא ופלטיא גדולה – One who finds something in a major thoroughfare or large public square, ובכל מקום שהרבים מצויין שם – or any place in which many people are commonly found, הרי אלו שלו – they belong to [the finder], מפני שהבעלים מתיאשין מהן – because the owners' despair of retrieving them, even if they have a siman. Five questions are posed about this ruling: (1) Does Rebbe Shimon only allow keeping an item found ברוב כנענים – in an area where the majority of people are Canaanites (where the item likely belongs to a Gentile, and even a Jewish owner despairs since it will likely be found by a Gentile), but ברוב ישראל – where the majority of people are Jews, he would not allow keeping it, or does his ruling apply even in an area of mostly Jews (Tosafos explains because it is likely a dishonest person will take it)? (2) Assuming his ruling applies even ברוב ישראל, do the Rabbonon agree with him? (3) If they disagree, do they even disagree ברוב כנענים? (4) If they disagree even ברוב כנענים, whom does the halachah follow? (5) If the halachah is like Rebbe Shimon, is it so even ברוב כנענים? The Gemara notes that Rav Assi distinguishes between רוב כנענים and רוב ישראל.
- Finding shechted animals
Rebbe Chanina once found a shechted goat between Teveria and Tzippori, and they permitted it to him. Rebbe Ami explained that he was permitted to keep it, based on Rebbe Shimon ben Elazar’s ruling (about publicly frequented places), and permitted him to eat it (and assumed it was shechted properly) based on Rebbe Chananya the son of Rebbe Yose HaGlili’s ruling: a Baraisa teaches that if one lost his goats or chickens, and later found them shechted, Rebbe Yehudah prohibits them to be eaten, because they may not have been shechted properly, and Rebbe Chanina the son of Rebbe Yose HaGlili permits them. Rebbe says that Rebbe Yehudah’s opinion seems correct כשמצאן באשפה - when he found them in a garbage heap (indicating it was thrown away), and Rebbe Chananya’s opinion seems correct כשמצאן בבית – when he found them in a house. Rava says that this incident does not prove that we pasken like Rebbe Shimon ben Elazar even by רוב ישראל, because it is possible that this area was mostly Gentiles, ורוב טבחי ישראל - but most of the shochtim were Jews.
