(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf

Bava Metzia 29



(a) Rebbi Tarfon declares a finder who sells an animal which eats but does not work a Shomer Sachar on the money, only because he is permitted to use it. A regular Shomer Aveidah it seems - is only a Shomer Chinam ...

(b) ... a Kashya on Rav Yosef, who considers every Shomer Aveidah to be a Shomer Sachar ...

(c) ... because (at times when he is seeing to the Aveidah) he gains the Perutah that he would otherwise be obligated to give a poor man who comes to the door.

(d) Rav Yosef answers the Kashya - by establishing the Machlokes Tana'im (not by Geneivah va'Aveidah of a Shomer Sachar, but) by Onsin of a Sho'el.

(a) The problem Rav Yosef's interpretation of our Mishnah poses on Rebbi Akiva, who says 'Lo Yishtamesh Bahen. Lefichach Im Avdu Ein Chayav be'Achrasuyan' is - why he needs to add 'Lefichach ... ' at all. Is it not obvious that someone who is not permitted to use a Pikadon is not a Sho'el?

(b) This would not have been a problem had we interpreted 'Avdu' literally - because then Rebbi Akiva would have added it to teach us that he is not a Shomer Sachar at all, even because of 'P'rutah de'Rav Yosef'.

(c) We answer that Rebbi Akiva says 'Lefichach', only to balance the 'Lefichach' of Rebbi Tarfon - who says it to teach us that he becomes a Sho'el because he is permitted to use it, even though he has not yet done so.

(d) To answer the Kashya how Rav Yosef can possibly establish the Machlokes by Onsin de'Sho'el, when the Tana specifically mentions 'Avdu', we cite Rabah elsewhere, who interprets ...

1. ... 'Nignevu' to mean - by armed robbers (which is an O'nes).
2. ... 'Avdu' to mean - that his ship sunk in the sea (which is an O'nes, too).



(a) When Rachbah asked Rav Yosef about using money belonging to Yesomim that he was looking after - he permitted him to do so, based on Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel, who rules like Rebbi Tarfon in our Mishnah?

(b) Abaye objected to Rav Yosef's ruling on the grounds - that even Rebbi Tarfon only permitted the finder to keep the money that he received from the sale of an animal that eats but does not work, but not the actual money (or article) that he finds.

(c) Sure, we have learned that one may keep money that one finds - but not if one found it in a purse or three coins that were lying like a tower.

(d) Rav Yosef's last words on the subject were - 'Go, they will not let me permit you to use it!'

(a) Someone who finds Sefarim (in scroll form) looks after them ...
1. ... (assuming he knows how to read) - by reading them once every thirty days.
2. ... (assuming he does not) - by rolling them from beginning to end once every thirty days.
(b) The reason for this is - to let in the air, to prevent mold from setting in.

(c) Besides learning something that he has not learned before - our Mishnah adds the prohibition of allowing someone else to read with him simultaneously.

(a) Similarly, the Tana of our Mishnah obligates someone who finds a garment, to shake it and spread it out once every thirty days - but not if it is for his own Kavod (as will be explained later).

(b) If he finds vessels made of ...

1. ... silver or copper - he uses them once in a while for their good.
2. ... gold or glass - he should not touch them, the one because it does not go moldy, the other, because it breaks easily.
(c) We just learned that the finder only uses the silver or copper vessels for their good - to prevent them from going moldy, bearing in mind that the method of looking after them is by burying them in the ground (as we shall see later).

(d) He is not then permitted - to use the vessels for long periods of time.

6) The Tana exempts a dignified person who finds a sack or a box - from picking it up and taking it home ...


(a) Shmuel permits someone who finds Tefilin to assess their value and put the money aside and use them immediately. The difference in this regard, between Tefilin and Sefarim, which he is not permitted to 'buy' is - the fact that Tefilin are easily replaceable from Bei bar Chavu (the name of a local Sofer), whereas Sefarim are more rare to come by (though this S'vara may well not apply today).

(b) Resh Lakish extrapolates from the Mishnah in Gitin, which forbids a Sheli'ach of a Get from handing the object that the woman gives him for her ex-husband, to anyone else - that someone who borrows or rents an object, may not lend or rent it to anybody else (because the owner may not agree that the article be handed over to a third party).

(c) The Tana of the Beraisa nevertheless finds it necessary to forbid a borrower to lend a Sefer-Torah to someone else - because we may have thought that the owner will be only pleased that someone performs a Mitzvah with his money.

(d) And he finds it necessary to permit the borrower to open the Sefer and read from it (not for any intrinsic Chidush, but) - because he wants to add the prohibition of learning something new.

(a) The Din of a Sefer that one receives for safe-keeping is similar to that of someone who finds one. The Tana of the Beraisa requires the guardian to open it once every twelve months. He prohibits him from reading it - if he opened it for his own benefit.

(b) Sumchus qualifies basic Halachah - by restricting it to an old Sefer, but not to a new one, which turns moldy quicker than an old one. Consequently, he increases the obligation to once every thirty days.

(c) Rebbi Eliezer ben Ya'akov says once every twelve months. However, because this tallies with the opinion of the Tana Kama - he must have meant once every thirty days.

(d) The author of our Mishnah, which rules once every thirty days, is Rebbi Eliezer ben Ya'akov.

(a) The Beraisa rules that someone who finds a Sefer - is forbidden repeat or translate the Parshah that he reads for its good.

(b) The maximum number of columns that the finder may open at one time is - two.

(c) The Tana also forbids three people to read in one volume simultaneously. We reconcile this with our Mishnah, which forbids even one person to read together with the finder when he opens and reads from it - by establishing our Mishnah when they want to read from the same context (and each is likely to pull the Sefer towards himself, ripping the Sefer in two); whereas the Beraisa speaks when they intend to read two different contexts, which they can organize without fighting over it (see also Hagahos ha'G'ra).

(a) Rebbi Yochanan says that someone who has a professional weaver in his household - can afford to shake out his clothes every day (implying that this is bad for the clothes).

(b) We reconcile this with our Mishnah, which obligates someone who finds an article of clothing to shake it and spread it out once every thirty days, implying that shaking is good for the garment, in a number of ways. The first answer, which makes a distinction between doing it once every thirty days and once a day, is inherent in the respective wordings of the two statements. It might also depend upon - whether one person shakes it (our Mishnah), or two (Rebbi Yochanan).

(c) Thirdly, it might depend upon whether one uses one's hands (our Mishnah) or beats it with a stick (Rebbi Yochanan) - and finally it might depend upon whether it is a woolen garment (Rebbi Yochanan) or a linen one (the Mishnah) See also Hagahos ha'G'ra.

(a) Rebbi Yochanan advises a person to drink a bewitched cup of water rather than a cup of warm water. This applies - to water in a metal cup but not in an earthenware one.

(b) Even in a metal cup it doesn't matter if the water boiled first and then cooled down. Nor will it matter even in a metal cup, and even if the water did not boil first - if the cup also contains herbs.

(a) Rebbi Yochanan advises someone who inherited a lot of money and doesn't know what to do with it - to ...
1. ... wear linen clothes.
2. ... use glass vessels.
3. ... hire workers and not supervise them.
(b) By linen clothes, Rebbi Yochanan means Roman flax, and by glass vessels, white glass - both of which are very expensive and spoil easily.

(c) Unsupervised workers working with oxen will result in a huge loss - because they will work in the vineyards, breaking the vines as well as the oxen's legs.

Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,