That we must return wool shearings together with a lost sheep, so the owner can make a new Simla (garment).
That we return something based on a Siman on something found with it, like a Simla (garment) that has a Siman on the belt, or a donkey that has a Siman on its saddle.
That we must even return the hair at the end of an ox’s tail, for these may be used to make a trim on the Simla’s collar.
That everything that has a Siman, and that people claim, must be announced.
That there is a Mitzva of Hashavas Avaida.
Must dung be returned with the animal?
Yes, it is used for fertilizer!
No, the owner is Mafkir any dung that is not on his property.
No, it is assumed to be less than a Shuveh P’ruta, and the owner is therefore Misya’aish.
Only when it is more than a Shuveh P’ruta.
It is assumed that the owner allows the finder the dung as a thank-you gift for caring for his animal.
Must an object that is worth less than a P’ruta be announced?
Yes; it is a usable object, so we don’t look at the monetary value.
No, it is not considered losing “something” or finding “something.”
No, we assume that the loser is Mafkir it.
Only when it is usable together with something else.
When it belongs to a Yisrael, and not when it belongs to a Nochri.
What is the Nafka Mina if Simanim are D’Oraisa or D’rabanan?
Must an Avaida be returned?
Must a Simla (garment) be returned?
Can a Get be returned to a Shlee’ach to use it to divorce a woman?
May a John Doe body be identified by the clothing on it?
There are no Nafka Minos.
If Simanim are Mid'Rabanan, why was the enactment made?
The owner knows that he has no witnesses, so he prefers to have it returned through Simanim (which are a lesser level of definitive proof) rather than not get it back at all.
Chazal don’t want the finder to have to hold on to the Avaida indefinitely.
Tzaar Baalei Chaim; an Avaida that is an animal will be better cared for by the owner, so Chazal instituted that it be returned with a lesser level of proof of ownership.