Question (against Rabah - Mishnah): Baker's loaves (the finder keeps them).

Inference: Loaves of a common person must be announced!

People have particular ways of making loaves, this is a Siman. The Mishnah's law applies even in the Reshus ha'Rabim, where they will be trampled!

Answer: They will not be trampled, because it is forbidden to trample on food.

Question: Also Nochrim walk there. They will trample on them!

Answer: Nochrim will not trample on them, for they are concerned for witchcraft.

Question: Animals and dogs walk there. They will trample on them!

Answer: The Mishnah discusses a place where animals and dogs are uncommon.

Suggestion: Tana'im argue as Rabah and Rava argue.

(Mishnah - R. Yehudah): One must announce anything unusual, such as pottery in a ring of figs, or coins in a loaf.

Inference: The first Tana holds that the finder keeps them!

We are thinking that all agree that a Siman that comes by itself is a (valid) Siman, and one may trample on food.)

Version #1- Suggestion: The first Tana holds that a Siman that will be trampled on is not a Siman, and R. Yehudah holds that it is a Siman! (Shitah Mekubetzes - R. Yehudah mentioned a Shinuy, for only Simanim that came by themselves are lost through trampling.)

Rejection #1 (Rav Zvid citing Rava): If the first Tana held that a Siman that will be trampled on is not a Siman, and one may trample on food, he would not obligate announcing loaves (not of a baker) in the Reshus ha'Rabim!

Rather, both Tana'im hold that a Siman that will be trampled on is a Siman, and one may trample on food;

They argue about whether or not a Siman that comes by itself is a Siman. The first Tana holds that it is not, R. Yehudah holds that it is.

Rejection #2 (on behalf of Rabah): Both Tana'im hold that a Siman that will be trampled on is not a Siman, and one may not trample on food;

They argue about whether or not a Siman that comes by itself is a Siman (like above).

Version #2: Both Tana'im hold that a Siman that comes by itself is a Siman, and a Siman that will be trampled on is not a Siman.

Suggestion: They argue about whether or not one may trample on food. The first Tana permits, and R. Yehudah forbids.

Rejection #1 (Rav Zvid citing Rava): If the first Tana held that a Siman that will be trampled on is not a Siman, and one may trample on food, he would not obligate announcing loaves (not of a baker) in the Reshus ha'Rabim!

Rather, both Tana'im hold that a Siman that will be trampled on is a Siman, and one may trample on food;

They argue about whether or not a Siman that comes by itself is a Siman.

Rejection #2 (on behalf of Rabah): Both Tana'im hold that a Siman that will be trampled on is not a Siman, and one may not trample on food;

They argue about whether or not a Siman that comes by itself is a Siman.

(Rav Zvid): The general rule of Aveidos is, when the owner says 'woe for my loss of money', that is despair.

(Rav Zvid): The Halachah is, if one finds small bundles of sheaves in the Reshus ha'Rabim, the Siman will be trampled (so he keeps them);

In a Reshus ha'Yachid, if it looks like they fell, he keeps them. If it looks like they were placed down, he takes and announces them.

Both of these are when they have no Siman. If they have a Siman, whether in a Reshus ha'Yachid or Reshus ha'Rabim, whether they fell or were placed, he announces them.

(Mishnah): (The finder keeps) fish on a string.

Version #1 (Rosh) Question: Why does he keep them? The way they are tied should be a Siman!

Answer: All fishermen tie them this way.

Version #2 (Ramban): Since we do not say that the way he tied them is a Siman, it must be, this is not considered a Siman!

Rejection: The case is, they are tied like all fishermen tie them. (end of Version #2)

Question: The number of fish is a Siman!

Answer: There are as many as fishermen normally put on a string.

Question: Is the number found a Siman?

Answer (Rav Sheshes - Beraisa): If he found Kelim of silver or copper, or pieces of lead, or any metal Kelim, he returns them only to one who gives a Siman or their weight.

Since weight is a Siman, also the measure or number is a Siman.

(Mishnah): (The finder keeps) pieces of meat.

Question: The weight should be a Siman!

Answer: It is a standard weight that butchers sell.

Question: The limb should be a Siman, e.g. the flanks or thigh!

(Beraisa): If one finds pieces of fish or a bitten fish, he must announce it;

If one found barrels of wine, oil, grain, figs or olives, he keeps them.

Answer: In the Beraisa, the pieces are cut in a special way. This is a Siman.

Rabah bar Rav Huna used to cut triangular pieces of meat (to ensure that a Nochri not switch it with other meat).

Support: Presumably, the pieces of fish are similar to a bitten fish (taught with it), which is (very rare, and hence) a (superb) Siman.

(Beraisa): If one found barrels of wine, oil, grain, figs or olives, he keeps them.

Contradiction (Mishnah): If one found barrels of wine or oil, he must announce them.

Answer (R. Zeira): The Mishnah discusses barrels that were (opened and re)sealed. This is a Siman.

Question: If the Beraisa discusses open barrels, (one may not drink them, for) snakes can drink from them. The owner willingly forfeited them!

Answer #1 (R. Hoshaya): They are covered, but not plastered closed (this is not a Siman).

Answer #2 (Abaye): Also in the Beraisa they are resealed;

The Mishnah discusses before the season to sell wine came. It is rare to reseal a barrel then, so this is a Siman;

The Beraisa discusses after the season came. It is common to reseal barrels then, so it is not a Siman.

Rav Yakov bar Aba found a resealed barrel after the season came. Abaye ruled that he may keep it.

Question (Rav Bivi): Is the place (where it was left) a Siman?

Answer (Rav Nachman - Beraisa): If one found barrels of wine, oil, grain, figs or olives, he keeps them;

If the place were a Siman, he should announce where they were found!

Rejection (Rav Zvid): The case is, it was left at the dock where ships unload.

Version #1 - Question (Rav Mari): Why isn't it a Siman that he lost it at the docks?

Answer (Rav Mari): Just like he forgot a barrel there, others also forgot barrels.

Version #2 - Question (Rav Mari): (In general,) why isn't the place a Siman?

Answer (Rav Mari): Just like he forgot a barrel there, others also forgot barrels. (end of Version #2)

Reuven found pitch regarding the olive-presses; Rav ruled that he may keep it. Rav saw that Reuven was hesitant; he told him to split it with Rav's son Chiya.

Suggestion: This shows that Rav holds that place is not a Siman!

Rejection (R. Aba): No, he permitted it because the owner surely despaired. Nettles (a kind of mold) were growing on it.

(Mishnah - R. Shimon ben Elazar): One need not announce Anpurya Kelim.

Question: What is Anpurya?

Answer (Rav Yehudah): It is new Kelim that one does not yet recognize well.

Question: What is the case?

If they have a Siman, even if one does not yet recognize them, they must be returned!

If they have no Siman, even if one recognizes them, they need not be announced!

Answer: Really, he has no Siman;

If one does not yet recognize them, we are not concerned to announce it in case a Chacham recognizes it.