The Mishnah instructs how to deal with money found between the Kupos of Shekalim-Nedavah, Eitzim-Levonah, Kinin-Gozelei Olah.

We assume that the funds originated in the closer place, even to be lenient.

When neither source is closer, we attribute the funds to the more stringent place of origin.

Question: But only the Shekalim-Kinim Kupos were next to one-another (creating the doubt), not Shekalim-Nedavah!?

Answer: The Kupos were not in line, they were in a circle.

Question: Why do the equidistant funds go to Nedavah (since Shekalim are more stringent)?

Answer #1: The money may end up as Shirayim.

Answer #2: Fifty-fifty doubt is likened to a Korban whose owners died (and as Shekalim they would also go to Nedavah).

R. Yasa reported having heard (in Bavel) R. Yehudah ask this question of Shmuel.

Shmuel had taught that Shekalim (in the case where the owner designated the funds and then died) should go to Nedavah.

(R. Yochanan): The leftover funds must be destroyed.

(R. Eliezer): They go to Nedavah (as leftover Chatas).

Question: How can a Chatas be brought as an Olah?

Answer: It is a T'nai Beis Din.

Question: How are this woman's Korban needs addressed?

Answer: This, too, is a T'nai Beis Din (with the supplier).

Question: Why weren't other combinations mentioned in the Mishnah?

Answer: These were addressed by the general principle at the end of the Mishnah.

The Mishnah deals with money found in various parts of Yerushalayim and beyond regarding their Ma'aser status.

The Mishnah deals with found meat regarding the question of it being Neveilah or Pasul.

Even when the meat of Korbanos might be valid, it cannot be eaten, but it must be retained until it is certainly invalid, and then burnt.

The manner in which the meat is cut will indicate its origin.

Question: Could the money not be from Hekdesh (Shekalim)?

Answer: There is a Chazakah that the Kohen would not take money out of the Lishkah before redeeming it on an animal.

(R. Eliezer citing R. Hoshayah): Meat which became invalidated through Hesech ha'Da'as must develop an additional invalidation before being burned.

Our Mishnah (which says that it must develop an additional invalidation and is then burned) is cited as a support for the above.

(R. Yosi): The Law of the Mishnah is (not because of Hesech ha'Da'as, but rather) because of our doubts if the meat has already become invalid (Nosar).

([The above step according to the GR"A] R. Yosi): Such doubtful meat should be Tahor (as with any doubt in Reshus HaRabim), but the reason for burning this meat is we cannot eat it (since it may already be invalid) and we may not burn it (since it may not be invalid).

(R. Krispa citing R. Yosi b. Chaninah): Whole limbs are definitely Neveilah, and one would get Malkos for eating them.

This seems supported by our Mishnah which speaks in definite terms (permitted-completely, Neveilah-even with Malkos).

(Same source as (a) above) Whole limbs which are tied together are permitted.

A person is in doubt regarding the meat he bought in one of ten stores (nine sell Neveilah and 1 sells Kosher) - it is presumed not Kosher.

If he found meat in such a town, we follow the majority (non-Kosher)

Even if (in case (a) above) the nine stores sell Kosher, it is presumed non-Kosher.

If he found meat in such a town, we follow the majority (Kosher).

(R. Yochanan) If the meat were found in the hands of a Gentile, it is the same as in the markets above.

R. Mana pointed out an incident which, he said, indicated against R. Yochanan.

R. Yochanan restricted his law to a case where we saw the Gentile merchant leaving the store of a Jew.

An incident is recorded where a Jew bought meat through a Gentile from another Jew and it turned out to be Neveilah.

Rebbi taught that this one case cannot prohibit all of the butcher shops in town.