Returning Lost Objects: Difference between revisions
From Halachipedia
restructure
(restructure) |
|||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
==Torah Obligation== | ==Torah Obligation== | ||
===Returning Lost Objects=== | |||
# When a person finds a lost object and ignores it, one violates the negative commandment, "Do not overlook a lost object.<ref>Devarim 22:1, Rambam Gezela Va'aveda 11:1, Nimukei Yosef Baba Metzia 16a "Aseh", Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 141</ref> and also loses the positive commandment, "Pick up and return lost objects." <ref>Devarim 22:3, Devarim 22:1, Rambam Gezela Va'aveda 11:1, Nimukei Yosef Baba Metzia 16a "Aseh"<br> The Nimukei Yosef also cites the opinion fo the Ramban that one is only in violation of the aseh to return if he picked up the object. | # When a person finds a lost object and ignores it, one violates the negative commandment, "Do not overlook a lost object.<ref>Devarim 22:1, Rambam Gezela Va'aveda 11:1, Nimukei Yosef Baba Metzia 16a "Aseh", Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 141</ref> and also loses the positive commandment, "Pick up and return lost objects." <ref>Devarim 22:3, Devarim 22:1, Rambam Gezela Va'aveda 11:1, Nimukei Yosef Baba Metzia 16a "Aseh"<br> The Nimukei Yosef also cites the opinion fo the Ramban that one is only in violation of the aseh to return if he picked up the object. | ||
The Taz 259:1 holds that if one does not pick up a lost object one has lost both the positive and negative commandment of [[Hashavat Aveidah]] and Lo Tuchal Lehitalem. However, the Sma 259:1 holds that there’s only a violation of Lo Tuchal Lehitalem for overlooking a lost object. </ref> If one picks up the object in order to steal it one also violates three commands altogether, overlooking the object, not picking it up, and stealing it.<ref>S”A 259:1 writes clearly if one picks up the object to steal it, there’s a violation of both the positive and negative command as well as Lo Tigzol </ref> | The Taz 259:1 holds that if one does not pick up a lost object one has lost both the positive and negative commandment of [[Hashavat Aveidah]] and Lo Tuchal Lehitalem. However, the Sma 259:1 holds that there’s only a violation of Lo Tuchal Lehitalem for overlooking a lost object. </ref> If one picks up the object in order to steal it one also violates three commands altogether, overlooking the object, not picking it up, and stealing it.<ref>S”A 259:1 writes clearly if one picks up the object to steal it, there’s a violation of both the positive and negative command as well as Lo Tigzol </ref> | ||
# There's an obligation to return the lost object of a Jew once one sees it within a distance of 266.67 [[amot]]. <ref>Shulchan Aruch 259:! Brings the negative commandment not to pick up a fellow Jew's lost object. Shulchan Aruch C"M 272:5 rules that there's a mitzvah of [[carrying]] and picking up a fellow's animal and its burden up to a distance of 266 and 2/3 [[amot]]. The Bach C"M 259 writes that since [[carrying]] a fellow's burden and picking up his lost object are learned from one another there's an obligation to pick up a lost object if one sees it up to an distance of 266.67 [[amot]]. </ref> | # There's an obligation to return the lost object of a Jew once one sees it within a distance of 266.67 [[amot]]. <ref>Shulchan Aruch 259:! Brings the negative commandment not to pick up a fellow Jew's lost object. Shulchan Aruch C"M 272:5 rules that there's a mitzvah of [[carrying]] and picking up a fellow's animal and its burden up to a distance of 266 and 2/3 [[amot]]. The Bach C"M 259 writes that since [[carrying]] a fellow's burden and picking up his lost object are learned from one another there's an obligation to pick up a lost object if one sees it up to an distance of 266.67 [[amot]]. </ref> | ||
===Preventing Loss to Others=== | |||
#The Mitzvah to return someone’s object includes a command to prevent or minimize someone’s loss. <ref>Halachos of Others People’s Money by Rav Bodner, pg. 142 based on S”A 259:9</ref> | |||
#For example, Rav Moshe Feinstein writes that helping another Jew contest zoning issues that are hurting the value of their property.<ref>Shu"t Igrot Moshe CM 2:22, cited by Halachos of Others People’s Money pg. 142</ref> | |||
#If one sees water causing damage to another person's property, he is obligated to prevent further loss.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 259:9, Halachos of Others People’s Money pg. 142</ref> However, if the owner is aware of what is happening and chooses not to address it, you would not be obligated to minimize his loss.<ref>Halachos of Others People’s Money pg. 142</ref> | |||
==Who is Obligated?== | ==Who is Obligated?== | ||
#Men and women alike are obligated in the mitzva of Hashavat Aveda.<ref>Sefer Hachinuch Mitzva 538 based on Gemara Kiddushin 34a, Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 138</ref> | #Men and women alike are obligated in the mitzva of Hashavat Aveda.<ref>Sefer Hachinuch Mitzva 538 based on Gemara Kiddushin 34a, Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 138</ref> | ||
===If it’s not Befitting to Return a Lost Object=== | |||
#For a respected or elderly individual, if it’s not befitting to pick up and return a lost object then one is exempt from the mitzvah and doesn’t have to pick up the object. <ref>S”A C”M 263:1 based on Mishna Baba Metzia 29b and Gemara 30a, Aruch Hashulchan 263:1, Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 157. see there note 69 where he quotes Shulchan Aruch Harav CM Hilchot Metzia Seif 36 that even it isn't specifically an exemption for a talmid chacham but includes someone distinguished for other reasons such as wealth, family or any other reason. He adds though that this exemption would not exist for someone who only feels distinguished because of an inflated ego. </ref> If he can wait there without compromising his dignity until someone else comes to pick it up and return it, he must do so.<ref>Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 157-158</ref> | |||
#The general rule is that if the individual would not have picked his own item in such a situation, then he is exempt. <ref>S”A C”M 263:1 based Rava's comment on Baba Metzia 30b, Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 158</ref> However, had one picked up one’s own item because it’s not worth the trouble (and not because it’s beneath one’s dignity), one is still obligated in the mitzvah. <ref>Mamon Yisrael (Halachos of Others People’s Money by Rav Bodner, pg. 158), S”A HaRav (Hilchot Metziah #37) </ref> | |||
#In a place where such an individual would not be embarrassed, one is obligated in the mitzvah. <ref>S”A C”M 263:2 </ref> | |||
#Even if one is exempt it’s proper and good to go beyond the letter of the law and return the object. <ref>S”A C”M 263:3 </ref> However, some argue that a Talmid Chacham may not go beyond the letter of the law at the expense of the kavod for his Torah.<ref>Rama 263:3 argues on Shulchan Aruch and says that one may not return the item if it is beneath his dignity. Instead, if he wants to be strict he can pay out of his own pocket. Aruch Hashulchan 263:4 explains that the Rama's comment is only regarding a talmid chacham, whose dignity stems from the Torah he has acquired. People who are distinguished for other reasons, may be strict and go beyond the letter of the law to return an object. </ref> | |||
#A woman is obligated in [[Hashavat Aviedah]] however if it’s not befitting to pick up such an object then one is exempt. <ref>Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur S”A C”M 259,271 #4) </ref> | |||
==Where was it Found?== | ==Where was it Found?== | ||
| Line 19: | Line 33: | ||
#If the item falls into a place where it will not under normal circumstances be recovered (such as lost in the ocean), it becomes hefker. Someone who finds it would be allowed to keep it.<ref>Baba Metzia 22a, Shulchan Aruch 259:7, Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 154</ref> This is true even if the owner announces that he is not relinquishing ownership.<ref>Rosh Baba Metzia 2:2, Shulchan Aruch 259:7, Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 154 </ref> Nevertheless, the good and right thing to do would be to return it.<ref>Rama 259:7, Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 155 </ref> | #If the item falls into a place where it will not under normal circumstances be recovered (such as lost in the ocean), it becomes hefker. Someone who finds it would be allowed to keep it.<ref>Baba Metzia 22a, Shulchan Aruch 259:7, Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 154</ref> This is true even if the owner announces that he is not relinquishing ownership.<ref>Rosh Baba Metzia 2:2, Shulchan Aruch 259:7, Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 154 </ref> Nevertheless, the good and right thing to do would be to return it.<ref>Rama 259:7, Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 155 </ref> | ||
==Worth a Perutah== | ===In an Institution=== | ||
#It’s appropriate that the administration of a public establishment put up a sign or made an announcement that will let those who go there that if objects are left there until a certain date the establishment will do as they see fit with the objects. <ref>Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur S”A C”M 259,271 #28) </ref> | |||
==What Items Must be Returned== | |||
===Worth a Perutah=== | |||
# There isn't a mitzvah to return an object worth less than a Perutah. <ref>Shulchan Aruch 259:2 and 262:1 based on Gemara Baba Metzia 27a, Mamon Yisrael (Halachos of Others People’s Money by Rav Bodner, pg. 149. see note 33 there that if the item is worth more than that to the one who lost, Rav Moshe Feinstein holds that the item must be returned </ref> Therefore, one who finds such an item may leave it or keep it.<ref>Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 149</ref> | # There isn't a mitzvah to return an object worth less than a Perutah. <ref>Shulchan Aruch 259:2 and 262:1 based on Gemara Baba Metzia 27a, Mamon Yisrael (Halachos of Others People’s Money by Rav Bodner, pg. 149. see note 33 there that if the item is worth more than that to the one who lost, Rav Moshe Feinstein holds that the item must be returned </ref> Therefore, one who finds such an item may leave it or keep it.<ref>Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 149</ref> | ||
# For the purpose of this halacha, in America, one can consider the perutah to be a quarter, as it is the lowest denomination coin that is useable for buying something.<ref>Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 149-150 writes that in America in the year when the sefer was published in 5763 (2003) a dime could hardly purchase anything and certainly pennies and nickels cannot, so a quarter would be the minimum required to return</ref> | # For the purpose of this halacha, in America, one can consider the perutah to be a quarter, as it is the lowest denomination coin that is useable for buying something.<ref>Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 149-150 writes that in America in the year when the sefer was published in 5763 (2003) a dime could hardly purchase anything and certainly pennies and nickels cannot, so a quarter would be the minimum required to return</ref> | ||
==Forfeiture== | ===Forfeiture=== | ||
#If the owner of an item gives up on ever getting it back, that is considered a forfeiture of the object and it’s permissible to take and keep it.<ref>Shulchan Aruch C”M 262:5 based on Gemara Baba Metzia 23a, Mamon Yisrael (Halachos of Others People’s Money by Rav Bodner), pg. 151. </ref> That can happen in the following ways: | #If the owner of an item gives up on ever getting it back, that is considered a forfeiture of the object and it’s permissible to take and keep it.<ref>Shulchan Aruch C”M 262:5 based on Gemara Baba Metzia 23a, Mamon Yisrael (Halachos of Others People’s Money by Rav Bodner), pg. 151. </ref> That can happen in the following ways: | ||
##The owner says explicitly that he has given up hope.<ref>Shulchan Aruch CM 262:5, Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 152. see there note F, that if the finder wishes to be good and upright, he should go beyond the letter of the law and give it back if he knows who the owner is </ref> This is true even if the item has simanim.<ref>Shulchan Aruch CM 262:5, Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 152 </ref> | ##The owner says explicitly that he has given up hope.<ref>Shulchan Aruch CM 262:5, Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 152. see there note F, that if the finder wishes to be good and upright, he should go beyond the letter of the law and give it back if he knows who the owner is </ref> This is true even if the item has simanim.<ref>Shulchan Aruch CM 262:5, Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 152 </ref> | ||
| Line 30: | Line 49: | ||
#There is a mitzvah to return a lost object to someone who passed away by returning it to the inheritors of a deceased person. <ref>Avi Bezri Hashavat Aveidah p. 22 fnt. 7 says it is obvious that there's an obligation to return a lost object to the inheritors of the deceased if he was the owner of the lost object.</ref> | #There is a mitzvah to return a lost object to someone who passed away by returning it to the inheritors of a deceased person. <ref>Avi Bezri Hashavat Aveidah p. 22 fnt. 7 says it is obvious that there's an obligation to return a lost object to the inheritors of the deceased if he was the owner of the lost object.</ref> | ||
==Simanim== | ===Simanim=== | ||
#If an object has no identifying feature, then it is assumed that the owner has given up hope of finding the object and therefore has forfeited ownership of it. Therefore, one may take and keep the object. <ref>Mamon Yisrael (Halachos of Others People’s Money by Rav Bodner, pg. 154) </ref> | #If an object has no identifying feature, then it is assumed that the owner has given up hope of finding the object and therefore has forfeited ownership of it. Therefore, one may take and keep the object. <ref>Mamon Yisrael (Halachos of Others People’s Money by Rav Bodner, pg. 154) </ref> | ||
#The siman must be a unique feature and not a generic characteristic. <ref>Mamon Yisrael (Halachos of Others People’s Money by Rav Bodner, pg. 160). see there note 79 where he entertains the possibility that nowadays where so many products look the same, if you find an item that isn't so expensive you should return it with just a generic characteristic because people who lose items would want it that way. </ref> | #The siman must be a unique feature and not a generic characteristic. <ref>Mamon Yisrael (Halachos of Others People’s Money by Rav Bodner, pg. 160). see there note 79 where he entertains the possibility that nowadays where so many products look the same, if you find an item that isn't so expensive you should return it with just a generic characteristic because people who lose items would want it that way. </ref> | ||
| Line 45: | Line 64: | ||
##If it is found in a place where many people use such items, place would not be a siman. <ref>Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 163 based on Rama 262:9 from Baba Metzia 23b</ref> For example, a towel left in the mikvah. <ref>Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 163, Shu"t Minchat Yitzchak 3:17</ref> | ##If it is found in a place where many people use such items, place would not be a siman. <ref>Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 163 based on Rama 262:9 from Baba Metzia 23b</ref> For example, a towel left in the mikvah. <ref>Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 163, Shu"t Minchat Yitzchak 3:17</ref> | ||
==Items without Simanim== | ===Items without Simanim=== | ||
# Even if one finds an item without any Simanim, one may only keep it if he is sure that the original owner has forfeited his ownership, which happens when the owner discovers that the item was lost. <ref>S”A C”M 262:3 rules that even if the situation is one in which the owner would probably forfeit ownership if it was dropped by the owner and so he was unaware of the situation one may not take the object. Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 165 <br> | # Even if one finds an item without any Simanim, one may only keep it if he is sure that the original owner has forfeited his ownership, which happens when the owner discovers that the item was lost. <ref>S”A C”M 262:3 rules that even if the situation is one in which the owner would probably forfeit ownership if it was dropped by the owner and so he was unaware of the situation one may not take the object. Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 165 <br> | ||
Background: Baba Metzia 21b records a dispute regarding an item that is lost and the owner is not yet aware. Rava says that if a person loses something without realizing it, but once they do realize it, will give up looking for it and deem it owner-less, then the person who finds it can keep it. Abaye holds that he may not because Yiush shelo midaat, is not yiush, meaning it is not considered as if he gave up on finding the item until he is actually aware that it is lost. Shulchan Aruch rules in accordance with Abaye, as this is on the list of יע״ל קג״ם (Baba Metzia 22b) which the gemara says is the list of opinions of which we hold like Abaye against Rava. Shu"t Igrot oshe OC 1:184 for his explanation of the dispute surrounding yiush shelo midaat. </ref> If someone picked it up before the owner was aware of its loss, he would be obligated to return it, even if the owner subsequently gives up on finding it. Since he cannot identify the owner, he must keep it until Eliyahu Hanavi comes and tells him whose it is.<ref>Shulchan Aruch CM 262:3, Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 166. </ref> This is true even if one is not sure whether the owner was aware of the loss or not.<ref>Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 167 based on Taz 262:3 who quotes the Maggid Mishne (Gezela Va'aveda 14:5) who writes that even if there is a safek if the owner is aware or not, you would need to be strict.</ref> | Background: Baba Metzia 21b records a dispute regarding an item that is lost and the owner is not yet aware. Rava says that if a person loses something without realizing it, but once they do realize it, will give up looking for it and deem it owner-less, then the person who finds it can keep it. Abaye holds that he may not because Yiush shelo midaat, is not yiush, meaning it is not considered as if he gave up on finding the item until he is actually aware that it is lost. Shulchan Aruch rules in accordance with Abaye, as this is on the list of יע״ל קג״ם (Baba Metzia 22b) which the gemara says is the list of opinions of which we hold like Abaye against Rava. Shu"t Igrot oshe OC 1:184 for his explanation of the dispute surrounding yiush shelo midaat. </ref> If someone picked it up before the owner was aware of its loss, he would be obligated to return it, even if the owner subsequently gives up on finding it. Since he cannot identify the owner, he must keep it until Eliyahu Hanavi comes and tells him whose it is.<ref>Shulchan Aruch CM 262:3, Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 166. </ref> This is true even if one is not sure whether the owner was aware of the loss or not.<ref>Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 167 based on Taz 262:3 who quotes the Maggid Mishne (Gezela Va'aveda 14:5) who writes that even if there is a safek if the owner is aware or not, you would need to be strict.</ref> | ||
| Line 56: | Line 75: | ||
#In a place where Talmidei Chachamim are present, one must pick up even an item without Simanim and announce it like a regular lost object because a Talmid Chacham (who is known not to lie) is trusted to recognize his object without any Simanim unless the item is brand new, in which case it’s treated like an item without simanim in a place without Talmidei Chachamim. <ref>Mamon Yisrael (Halachos of Others People’s Money by Rav Bodner, pg. 171-2) based on Shulchan Aruch CM 262:21</ref> | #In a place where Talmidei Chachamim are present, one must pick up even an item without Simanim and announce it like a regular lost object because a Talmid Chacham (who is known not to lie) is trusted to recognize his object without any Simanim unless the item is brand new, in which case it’s treated like an item without simanim in a place without Talmidei Chachamim. <ref>Mamon Yisrael (Halachos of Others People’s Money by Rav Bodner, pg. 171-2) based on Shulchan Aruch CM 262:21</ref> | ||
#If you personally know whose item it is or if witnesses say who it belongs to, the finder must give it back, even without the owner identifying any siman.<ref>Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 160. Shulchan Aruch CM 267:9 writes that witnesses are stronger evidence than Simanim. Therefore, if one person gives simanim and another provides witnesses, the lost object should be given to the one with witnesses.</ref> | #If you personally know whose item it is or if witnesses say who it belongs to, the finder must give it back, even without the owner identifying any siman.<ref>Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 160. Shulchan Aruch CM 267:9 writes that witnesses are stronger evidence than Simanim. Therefore, if one person gives simanim and another provides witnesses, the lost object should be given to the one with witnesses.</ref> | ||
===Lost Object of a non-Jew=== | |||
==Lost Object of a non-Jew== | |||
#Technically, there’s no Mitzvah to return a lost object to a non-Jew, and some say that there’s a prohibition. <ref>Tur and S”A C”M 266:1 rule based on Gemara Baba Kama 113b that there’s no mitzvah to return the lost object of a non-Jew and there’s even a prohibition. The Beit Yosef there writes that according to Rashi the problem is that by returning an item to a non-Jew, you are showing that you don't perform Hashavat Aveda as a commandment of Hashem, because you are returning to a non-Jew which you aren't commanded to. On the other hand, the Rambam writes that returning such an object would be strengthening the hands of a sinner. The Be'er HaGolah 266:2 writes that according to Rashi this prohibition would apply even to non-Jews nowadays but according to the Rambam then there’s no prohibition to non-Jews nowadays who believe in a Creator and are law abiding citizens. Mamon Yisrael (Halachos of Others People’s Money by Rav Bodner, pg. 153) holds that there’s no prohibition nowadays. However, Hashava Aviedah KeHalacha (2:1 pg. 33) writes that nowadays there’s a prohibition like S”A. </ref> However, all agree that if one returns it with intention to make a Kiddush Hashem then it’s permissible and praiseworthy to return the object. <ref>Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 156. S”A C”M 266:1 writes that if one has intent to make a Kiddush Hashem then it’s totally permissible and praiseworthy to return the lost object. Hashava Aviedah KeHalacha (2:2 pg. 33) writes that it’s only permissible and praiseworthy if one is sure that returning it will result in Kiddush Hashem because the owner will praise Jews and not just the one who returned it (and if it’s a doubt one should refrain). see [http://www.torahmusings.com/2014/05/hashavat-aveida-a-kiddush-hashem/ Rabbi Aharon Ziegler] who quotes Rabbi Soloveitchik on the importance of returning a lost object to a non-Jew in fulfillment of the precious mitzvah of kiddush Hashem. see also [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/865907/rabbi-aryeh-lebowitz/ten-minute-halacha-hashavas-aveida-to-a-nochri/ Ten Minute Halacha: Hashavas Aveida to a nochri] by Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz </ref> Additionally, all agree that if a Chilul Hashem will result then there’s an obligation to return the object. <ref>S”A C”M 266:1 </ref> | #Technically, there’s no Mitzvah to return a lost object to a non-Jew, and some say that there’s a prohibition. <ref>Tur and S”A C”M 266:1 rule based on Gemara Baba Kama 113b that there’s no mitzvah to return the lost object of a non-Jew and there’s even a prohibition. The Beit Yosef there writes that according to Rashi the problem is that by returning an item to a non-Jew, you are showing that you don't perform Hashavat Aveda as a commandment of Hashem, because you are returning to a non-Jew which you aren't commanded to. On the other hand, the Rambam writes that returning such an object would be strengthening the hands of a sinner. The Be'er HaGolah 266:2 writes that according to Rashi this prohibition would apply even to non-Jews nowadays but according to the Rambam then there’s no prohibition to non-Jews nowadays who believe in a Creator and are law abiding citizens. Mamon Yisrael (Halachos of Others People’s Money by Rav Bodner, pg. 153) holds that there’s no prohibition nowadays. However, Hashava Aviedah KeHalacha (2:1 pg. 33) writes that nowadays there’s a prohibition like S”A. </ref> However, all agree that if one returns it with intention to make a Kiddush Hashem then it’s permissible and praiseworthy to return the object. <ref>Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 156. S”A C”M 266:1 writes that if one has intent to make a Kiddush Hashem then it’s totally permissible and praiseworthy to return the lost object. Hashava Aviedah KeHalacha (2:2 pg. 33) writes that it’s only permissible and praiseworthy if one is sure that returning it will result in Kiddush Hashem because the owner will praise Jews and not just the one who returned it (and if it’s a doubt one should refrain). see [http://www.torahmusings.com/2014/05/hashavat-aveida-a-kiddush-hashem/ Rabbi Aharon Ziegler] who quotes Rabbi Soloveitchik on the importance of returning a lost object to a non-Jew in fulfillment of the precious mitzvah of kiddush Hashem. see also [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/865907/rabbi-aryeh-lebowitz/ten-minute-halacha-hashavas-aveida-to-a-nochri/ Ten Minute Halacha: Hashavas Aveida to a nochri] by Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz </ref> Additionally, all agree that if a Chilul Hashem will result then there’s an obligation to return the object. <ref>S”A C”M 266:1 </ref> | ||
| Line 63: | Line 81: | ||
#If circumstances indicate that the non-Jew placed or hid that item there it may not be taken.<ref>Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 155 based on Netivot Hamishpat 260:4</ref> | #If circumstances indicate that the non-Jew placed or hid that item there it may not be taken.<ref>Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 155 based on Netivot Hamishpat 260:4</ref> | ||
#A Jewish apikores would have the status of a non-Jew for this halacha.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 266:2, Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 155. see there note 61 for how this would apply nowadays considering that many people are unfortunately not fully observant</ref> | #A Jewish apikores would have the status of a non-Jew for this halacha.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 266:2, Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 155. see there note 61 for how this would apply nowadays considering that many people are unfortunately not fully observant</ref> | ||
==What to do with the Item until the Owner is Found== | ==What to do with the Item until the Owner is Found== | ||
| Line 93: | Line 93: | ||
==If the Finder Knows who the Owner is== | ==If the Finder Knows who the Owner is== | ||
# If the finder knows who the item belongs to, he can call the owner and would not be obligated to deliver the item directly. It is the owner's responsibility to come retrieve it.<ref> Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 177 based on the opinion of Rav Moshe Feinstein </ref> | # If the finder knows who the item belongs to, he can call the owner and would not be obligated to deliver the item directly. It is the owner's responsibility to come retrieve it.<ref> Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 177 based on the opinion of Rav Moshe Feinstein </ref> | ||
# In a situation that he is unable to get in touch with the owner, he is responsible to return it responsibly and cannot just leave it | # In a situation that he is unable to get in touch with the owner, he is responsible to return it responsibly and cannot just leave it in a place that there is a risk it could be taken.<ref> Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 177 based on Shulchan Aruch Choshen Mishpat 267:1 </ref> | ||
==The Obligation to Publicize== | ==The Obligation to Publicize== | ||
