Observation: We see from here that Chulin geese and chickens that rebel against their owner by running away are considered ownerless, and whoever takes them acquires them.

Proof: This apparent from here, as the reason they are ownerless and are obligated in being sent away is because they rebelled (and ran away).

Observation: The Mishnah does not mean that the ox necessarily died, as the person is obligated to replace the ox even if it was stolen or it went lost since it is Kodshei Mizbe'ach. Similarly, according to Rebbi Yochanan, the house did not necessarily fall.

Question: This is difficult. Which type of Hekdesh is this referring to? If he said, "This should be" why is the case after the items were redeemed onto money? One is not even responsible for Hekdesh itself (dedicated in this fashion) that is stolen or lost!

Question (cont.): Rather, it must be referring to where he said, "It is upon me" even though one is responsible for such Hekdesh. However, once it is redeemed onto money he is not responsible for it. If so, why does Rebbi Nasan say, "One might think the same is true regarding this?" How can Erchin be compared to Hekdesh that is redeemed?

Question: This is difficult. Why doesn't the Mishnah say that Kisuy ha'Dam applies to male and females, while Shiluach ha'Ken only applies to females?

Question: Why do we need a Pasuk to include a nest in the sea? If it is because the Pasuk says, "on the land" it simply should not say "on the way" nor "on the land!"

Answer: However, "on the land" is needed to exclude an eagle (carrying a nest while flying) in the heavens.

Question: However, this is difficult. If so, what is the Gemara's question later that if one finds a nest in the heavens he should be obligated in Shiluach ha'Ken? The Pasuk says "on the land!"

Answer: It seems that the question is that a nest in the heavens should be obligated in Shiluach due to "on the way," and we should exclude a nest in the sea from "on the land." Why choose to do the opposite (exclude in the heavens and include in the sea)?

Question: Doesn't the Pasuk say, "How can they say to my soul that your mountain is flying away like a bird?" (This implies that a "Tzipor" can even refer to a non kosher bird!)

Answer: It is obvious that Dovid ha'Melech must have compared himself to a kosher bird. This is similar to the Pesukim "like a bird running from a trap of hunters" and "like birds flying away." (They must be referring to kosher birds, as they are referring to good people).

Question: Doesn't the Pasuk say, "Even a bird found a home?" This is referring to a non kosher bird as well, as why would we say that a kosher bird found a home but a non kosher bird did not?

Answer: However, it is possible that this is referring to a kosher bird, as is apparent from the second part of the Pasuk that states, "And a Dror has a nest." A Dror is a kosher bird, as is apparent from the Gemara earlier (62a).

Implied Question: The Pasuk states, "That there birds will nest, a Chasidah etc. (A Chasidah is a non kosher bird. Doesn't this indicate that bird can refer to a non kosher bird?)

Answer: It is possible that the Pasuk cites Chasidah as an example of all non kosher birds, and it cites "birds" in reference to kosher birds (but Chasidah is not included in "birds").