Lesson # 218 (part one) • Lost & Found

In many Yeshivot, the first chapter of Gemara that is taught to the beginner student is the second perek of Baba Metzia, Eilu Metztiot, dealing with the laws of lost and found property. We now embark an a long series of lessons dealing with this topic.

The Torah requires every Jew, man or woman, who sees an object lost by a fellow Jew in a public place, to stop, pick up the object, to care for it until it is restored to the owner, and to restore it to its rightful owner. These Torah requirements are only present when all of the criteria listed in the Introductory lessons are present.

The Torah command appears as follows in Deuteronomy 22:1-3,5: "You shall not see the ox of your brother or his sheep or goat cast off, and hide yourself from (ignore) them; you shall surely return them to your brother. If your brother is not near you and you do not know him, then gather it inside your house, and it shall remain with you until your brother inquires after it, and you shall return it to him. So shall you do for his donkey so shall you do for his garment, and so shall you do for any lost article of your brother that may become lost from him and you find it; you shall not hide yourself."

What emerges from these verses are two commandments: (1) the negative commandment "not to turn aside" when one sees a lost object, and (2) the positive commandment to restore the lost object to its rightful owner.
There are also circumstances under which the additional transgression of "not to rob" may be present.

The laws that follow assume that all of the criteria are present. The mere turning aside and not bothering to pick up the lost object is a transgression of the negative commandment of not to turn aside, and also a transgression of the positive commandment to restore the found object to its owner. Thus if one sees a lost object, and the criteria listed below are met, he cannot ignore the object; he must pick it up and then seek out the owner and restore it him.

Assume the finder picks up the object with the intent of not restoring it to the owner. The finder transgresses the positive command "to restore the object," and two negative commandments: "not to turn aside" and "not to rob:' If this finder, in a spirit of contrition, decides to restore the object to the owner, he has still transgressed the negative commandment of "not to turn aside." The other two transgressions, of restoring the object and not robbing, have been rectified. Once there was the original intent not to restore the object, the three transgressions are violated and cannot be undone by the return of the object. If the finder returns the object before the loser abandons hope of its being restored, then the finder transgresses only the negative commandment not to turn aside. The commandment not to turn aside can only be performed when the finder spies the object. His intent then, to keep the object for himself by not restoring it to the owner cannot be undone. The Torah commandment "not to turn aside" and to restore the object to the owner is present whether the person who lost the object is known or not known to the finder, and whether the owner is close or far away from the finder. It does not matter whether the found object is animate or inanimate. The person who finds the lost object must make every attempt to restore it to its owner, as described in these lessons.

Assume one picks up an object with the intent of restoring it to the owner. After- ward, the finder decides not to restore the object to the owner. The finder transgresses two commandments: the positive commandment of restoring the lost object and the negative commandment not to rob.

Assume the finder originally picked up the object with the intention to restore it to the owner. The finder delayed in restoring the object to the owner. The owner thereafter abandoned hope of recovering the object. The abandonment of hope of recovering the object breaks the unity of all of the criteria being present, and there is no longer an obligation to restore the object to the owner. Then the finder decides to keep the object. He has nevertheless transgressed the commandment to restore the object, and the object still does not belong to him because he picked it up before the owner abandoned hope of the object being restored to him.

Assume Shimon saw the object and did not pick it up. After Reuven, the owner, abandoned hope of the object being restored to him, Shimon went and picked up the object. He has transgressed the commandment not to turn aside from lost objects.

The law of restoring lost objects is not limited to objects that are literally lost, but applies to other situations as well. For example, if someone's animal is sick, a veterinarian must attempt to cure that animal. The veterinarian has the role of the finder and the owner of the animal has the role of the loser. Or if Shimon sees a river surging and threatening to overrun Reuven's real estate and/or house and Shimon has the ability to place a barrier in the way of the river and save Reuven's property; Shimon is under the same obligation to help save Reuven's real estate as he is to restore Reuven's lost object.

If one finds a cow grazing in vineyards or farms, he must remove the cow from the vineyard because of the damage that it can cause and must restore the cow to its owner. This holds true even if the cow is found in the vineyards or farm of a Gentile if the finder thinks that the Gentile may kill the cow for trespassing and causing damage to his fields. There is an opinion that if a person is wandering around aimlessly and as if lost, he must be taken to a place where he can be cared for. There is an opinion that the obligation of a doctor to heal the sick is part of restoring that which the owner has lost, his health in this case.

As stated above, it is not every object that the finder spies that he is obligated to pick up. There are certain criteria that have to be present and if any of them are missing, the finder is not under any obligation to pick up the object:

(1) The owner has not abandoned hope (or, under the circumstances, is not presumed to have abandoned hope) of the object being restored to him by a Jew who will find the object.
(2) The object must be identifiable.
(3) The object must be found in a place where the obligation exists to restore the found object.
(4) The object is a lost object.
(5) The object must be worth at least a peruta.
(6) To restore the object must be consistent with the finder's dignity
(7) The object must belong to someone to whom the finder owes a duty to pick up his lost object.

If all of the criteria are present, the finder must pick up the object so as to restore it to the owner. If any of these seven criteria are not present, the obligations under the Torah commandments to stop to pick up the object and to restore it to its owner are not applicable.

Criteria (1), the owner has not abandoned hope, and criteria (2), the object must be identifiable, are closely interlinked. If the object is identifiable, the owner will usually not abandon hope; if the object is not identifiable, the owner will usually abandon hope. These criteria will be discussed in the next lessons.

The subject matter of this lesson is more fully discussed in Volume VIII Chapter 259 of A Restatement of Rabbinic Civil Law by E. Quint. Copies of all volumes can be purchased via email: orders@gefenpublishing.com and via website: www.israelbooks.com and at local Judaica bookstores.
Questions to quint@inter.net.il

[The Parshat Sh'mot Homepage]
[The TORAH tidbits Homepage] [How to use TORAH tidbits]
[About The OU/NCSY Israel Center] [About TORAH tidbits]
[www.ou.org]