Babylonian Talmud

Rodkinson 1918 — source 11, scan section 49

acquainted with it." How was the case if the vessels had a mark ? What is it if the eye was not yet acquainted with them, and if there was no mark ? What use is it that the eye should be acquainted with them ? It can be used to return it to a young scholar who claims that he recognized them by seeing. If the eye was acquainted with them, we do so; if not, we do not. As R. Jehudah said in the name of Samuel in the follow- ing three things. The rabbis hesitate to tell the truth when being questioned in a tractate {e.g., if some one asked, can you repeat the tractate so and so by heart, they answer no, although it is not true, out of modesty), and in conversation between him and his wife, and also about the hospitality of a private one, they usually answer in the negative, although it is not so (because people should not abuse his liberality and bring the man to poverty). And when it was questioned to what purpose did Samuel declare the above. Mar Zutra answered: " It was said with regard to returning a lost thing to one of the rabbis, if he recognized it with his eye, if we know that only in the * The text reads Kufra, and Rashi explains it to mean pitch. We, however, cannot agree with such an explanation, as the place where it was found, and also that Rabh told him to give a part of it to his son, could not be with such an article. We find the same word Kufra in Baba Kama, p. 140, which is translated as we have it here. 52 THE BABYLONIAN TALMUD. above three things he hesitates to tell the truth, but in all other things he speaks the truth, then the article in question is to be returned to him, but not otherwise." It happened that a silver goblet was stolen from Mar Zutra the pious, when he was in a hospes ; in the mean time he saw a young man who dried his hands, after washing, with the gar- ment of another, and he thought, this man does not care for his neighbor's money, and he accused him until he confessed that he stole the goblet. We have learned in a Boraitha: R. Simeon b. Elazar admits that new vessels, in case the eye was familiar with them, that he must proclaim them; however, the follow- ing new vessels which were not familiar to the eye he need not : namely, strings of needles, spinning instruments, and strings of hooks, but only when he found single strings; if, however, he found a pair of each, he must proclaim. The same R. Simeon used to say: " If one saved something from a lion, a bear, a tiger, or a bardalas, or from the sea, or if he found it on a dock or in one of the great markets, and in any place where it is crowded, he may keep it for himself, as the owner of it has surely renounced hope.* It happened that one found four zuz tied up in a rag, and was dropped in the river Biron, and he came before R. Jehudah and was told to proclaim. Why so ; is it not equal to the depth of a sea, as stated above ? With the river Biron is different, because it was frequently cleaned, and there were stones and fences for fishing, the loser may not renounce his hope in regaining it; furthermore that the majority of the fishers and the cleaners of that river were Israelites, and the loser may think that in case an Israelite finds it he may return it. R. Jehudah was walking behind Mar Samuel in the market, where wheat prepared for fermenting was sold, and R. Jehudah questioned him : How would be the case if some one should find a purse here ? And he answered : It would belong to the finder. But how if an Israelite would come and give the mark of it ? (the former questioned again). And Mar Samuel answered, then he would be obliged to return. The former rejoined: Are not the two decisions contradictory ? And he answered : I mean not according to the exact law, but by moderating the * In the text the discoursing continues on what places must be considered always crowded, and what not ; if the synagogues and houses of learning are among them, and what kind of people, Israelites or heathen, all of which is of no importance, and therefore we have omitted it. TRACT BABA METZIA (MIDDLE GATE). 53 same, as it happened to my father, who found certain asses in a desert and returned them to the owner after an elapse of twelve months ; though he was not obliged to do so in accord- ance with the strict law, he nevertheless did so by moderating the same. Rabha happened to walk behind R. Na'hman in the market of tanners, according to others in the market where the rabbis used to assemble, and he questioned him : How if one would find here a purse ? And he answered: It would belong to him. And how if an Israelite would claim that it is his by giving a mark ? And he answered it counts for nothing; but if he claims with a certainty that it is surely his, Rabha said again. And the latter rejoined, it would be equal to him who cries for his col- lapsed house or for his sunken ship (as the ownership of it is lost with the losing). There was a vulture which captured meat in the market, and put it between the trees of Bar Marian, and when Bar Marian came to question Abayi, he was told to keep it for himself. Although the majority of the inhabitants were Israelites, hence infer from this that the Halakha prevails in accordance with R. Simeon b. Elazar of our Mishna, even in case the majority are Israelites? With the vulture it is different, as it may be just as the depth of the sea. But did not Rabh declare that meat which was hidden from the eye must not be eaten for fear it is not legally slaughtered ? It may be said that Bar Marian saw the vulture taking it from a place where legal meat was sold. R. Hanina found a slaughtered goat on the way from Tiberias to Ziporus, and he was allowed to use it. Said R. Ami : It was allowed as a found article in a crowded place, in accordance with R. Simeon b. Elazar; and also as a legal slaughter in accordance with R. Hananiah b. R. Jose the Galilean of the following Boraitha : If one has lost his goats or hens, and there- after he found them slaughtered, R. Jehudah prohibited their use, and R. Hananiah b. R. Jose the Galilean allowed it. Said Rabbi : It seems that the opinion of R. Jehudah is correct when he found it in rubbish, and the opinion of R. Hananiah is cor- rect when he found it in a house. Infer from all this that if one finds an article in a crowded place it is his, even when the majority of the inhabitants are Israelites. Said Rabha: Such meat may be used even when the majority of the inhabitants are heathen, but the majority of the butchers are Israelites. R. Ami found slaughtered pigeons on the way from Tiberias to Ziporus, and he questioned R. Assi, according to others R. 54 THE BABYLONIAN TALMUD. Johanan, and according to still others he questioned the col-