Difference between revisions of "Returning Lost Objects"

From Halachipedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(restructure)
 
Line 16: Line 16:
  
 
===If it’s not Befitting to Return a Lost Object===
 
===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>
#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>
 
#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>
 
#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>
 
#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>
 
#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>
 +
 +
==Being Compensated==
 +
# One may not charge for returning a lost object to its owner, even if returning it takes times and effort.<ref> Rosh Baba Metzia 2:28, Tosafot Baba Metzia 31b s.v. "Im", Tur and Shulchan Aruch C.M. 265:1, Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 181 </ref> However, if the owner understands that he doesn't have to pay but offers compensation as a token of appreciation, the finder may accept it.<ref> Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 182, Shu"T Teshuvot Vehanhagot 3:463 </ref>
 +
# The finder is not required to lose money in order to return another person's item.<ref>Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 182</ref> This includes foregoing saving his own item<ref>The Mishna on Baba Metzia 33a states that his own lost item takes precedence over someone else's. This is codified by Shulchan Aruch C.M. 264:1. However, see Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 182 (based on Shulchan Aruch Harav Hilchot Metzia 33 that if the other person's item is worth more than his, and he feels certain that his friend will reimburse him for the loss he would incur in order to save that item, he is not permitted to save his own at the expense of his friend's.</ref>, incurring expenses of his own<ref>Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 183 based on Sma 264:1. However, he adds (based on SA Harav Hilchot Metzia 33) that if the finder feels certain that he will be reimbursed by the loser, he should spend the money.</ref>, losing wages<ref>Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 183, Shulchan Aruch Harav Hilcot Metzia 33. see there note i-j where he adds based on Rav Moshe Feinstein that even if he will not lose any salary but his employer objects to his taking the time, he is exempt from the mitzva during work hours. If he can pick it up and return it after work hours, he must do so.</ref>, losing potential profit.<ref>Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 182</ref>
  
 
==Where was it Found?==
 
==Where was it Found?==
#If one would attempt to return an item that was placed there intentionally, one could be hurting the owner rather than helping. If it is an item that has no simanim, then he won't be able to retrieve it, and even if it has simanim, it could be he wanted it there and now will have to chase you to get it back.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 260:9, Halachos of Others People’s Money pg. 144</ref> Therefore, if an item seems to have fallen, it is obviously a lost item. On the other hand, it if seems to have been placed or hidden, it might not be considered lost.<ref>Halachos of Others People’s Money by Rav Bodner, pg. 144</ref> Therefore, this would depend on where it is found. see the following halachot:
+
# If one would attempt to return an item that was placed there intentionally, one could be hurting the owner rather than helping. If it is an item that has no simanim, then he won't be able to retrieve it, and even if it has simanim, it could be he wanted it there and now will have to chase you to get it back.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 260:9, Halachos of Others People’s Money pg. 144</ref> Therefore, if an item seems to have fallen, it is obviously a lost item. On the other hand, it if seems to have been placed or hidden, it might not be considered lost.<ref>Halachos of Others People’s Money by Rav Bodner, pg. 144</ref> Therefore, this would depend on where it is found. see the following halachot:
 
#If the object was found in a safe protected place, it can be assumed that the item was placed there by its owner and so the object is not considered lost and should not be touched.<ref>Rama 260:10 based on Baba Metzia 25b, Halachos of Others People’s Money pg. 145</ref> If one by accident picked it up, one should return it right away, but if one has left the area one may not return it but rather one must return the object. <ref>Rama and S”A C”M 260:9-10, Halachos of Others People’s Money pg. 145</ref> For example, if one found a key under a mat or a book on top of a public telephone booth, one shouldn’t pick up the object. <ref>Halachos of Others People’s Money pg. 146</ref>
 
#If the object was found in a safe protected place, it can be assumed that the item was placed there by its owner and so the object is not considered lost and should not be touched.<ref>Rama 260:10 based on Baba Metzia 25b, Halachos of Others People’s Money pg. 145</ref> If one by accident picked it up, one should return it right away, but if one has left the area one may not return it but rather one must return the object. <ref>Rama and S”A C”M 260:9-10, Halachos of Others People’s Money pg. 145</ref> For example, if one found a key under a mat or a book on top of a public telephone booth, one shouldn’t pick up the object. <ref>Halachos of Others People’s Money pg. 146</ref>
 
#If an item is found in a unsafe place, the item is considered a lost object, even if it was clearly placed their intentionally.<ref>Halachos of Others People’s Money pg. 146 based on Rama 260:10</ref> For example, a book on a public bus station bench. <ref>Halachos of Others People’s Money pg. 146</ref>
 
#If an item is found in a unsafe place, the item is considered a lost object, even if it was clearly placed their intentionally.<ref>Halachos of Others People’s Money pg. 146 based on Rama 260:10</ref> For example, a book on a public bus station bench. <ref>Halachos of Others People’s Money pg. 146</ref>
Line 35: Line 38:
 
===In an Institution===
 
===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>
+
# 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==
 
==What Items Must be Returned==

Latest revision as of 16:42, 9 October 2020

The Torah commands us to return lost objects and prevent a loss to our fellow Jew. [1] In general, if there’s an identifying mark of the lost object then there’s an obligation to return the object of our fellow Jew by safeguarding it, publicizing the loss of the object, and making sure that the rightful owner receives his object. Being that many of these cases involve intricate details that aren’t addressed below, in a real case, one should consult a competent rabbinic authority for guidance.

Torah Obligation

Returning Lost Objects

  1. When a person finds a lost object and ignores it, one violates the negative commandment, "Do not overlook a lost object.[2] and also loses the positive commandment, "Pick up and return lost objects." [3] 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.[4]
  2. There's an obligation to return the lost object of a Jew once one sees it within a distance of 266.67 amot. [5]

Preventing Loss to Others

  1. The Mitzvah to return someone’s object includes a command to prevent or minimize someone’s loss. [6]
  2. For example, Rav Moshe Feinstein writes that helping another Jew contest zoning issues that are hurting the value of their property.[7]
  3. If one sees water causing damage to another person's property, he is obligated to prevent further loss.[8] 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.[9]

Who is Obligated?

  1. Men and women alike are obligated in the mitzva of Hashavat Aveda.[10]

If it’s not Befitting to Return a Lost Object

  1. 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. [11] If he can wait there without compromising his dignity until someone else comes to pick it up and return it, he must do so.[12]
  2. The general rule is that if the individual would not have picked his own item in such a situation, then he is exempt. [13] 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. [14]
  3. In a place where such an individual would not be embarrassed, one is obligated in the mitzvah. [15]
  4. Even if one is exempt it’s proper and good to go beyond the letter of the law and return the object. [16] 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.[17]
  5. A woman is obligated in Hashavat Aviedah however if it’s not befitting to pick up such an object then one is exempt. [18]

Being Compensated

  1. One may not charge for returning a lost object to its owner, even if returning it takes times and effort.[19] However, if the owner understands that he doesn't have to pay but offers compensation as a token of appreciation, the finder may accept it.[20]
  2. The finder is not required to lose money in order to return another person's item.[21] This includes foregoing saving his own item[22], incurring expenses of his own[23], losing wages[24], losing potential profit.[25]

Where was it Found?

  1. If one would attempt to return an item that was placed there intentionally, one could be hurting the owner rather than helping. If it is an item that has no simanim, then he won't be able to retrieve it, and even if it has simanim, it could be he wanted it there and now will have to chase you to get it back.[26] Therefore, if an item seems to have fallen, it is obviously a lost item. On the other hand, it if seems to have been placed or hidden, it might not be considered lost.[27] Therefore, this would depend on where it is found. see the following halachot:
  2. If the object was found in a safe protected place, it can be assumed that the item was placed there by its owner and so the object is not considered lost and should not be touched.[28] If one by accident picked it up, one should return it right away, but if one has left the area one may not return it but rather one must return the object. [29] For example, if one found a key under a mat or a book on top of a public telephone booth, one shouldn’t pick up the object. [30]
  3. If an item is found in a unsafe place, the item is considered a lost object, even if it was clearly placed their intentionally.[31] For example, a book on a public bus station bench. [32]
  4. If an item is found in a semi-safe place, if the item has a siman then the item is considered a lost object. An example is a sweater draped over a park railing in a remote area of the park. [33]
  5. If the object is found in a place where it is irretrievable, such as if someone fell into the ocean, it’s assumed that the owner forfeited ownership and it is permissible to take and keep it. [34]

Cannot be Retrieved

  1. 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.[35] This is true even if the owner announces that he is not relinquishing ownership.[36] Nevertheless, the good and right thing to do would be to return it.[37]

In an Institution

  1. 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. [38]

What Items Must be Returned

Worth a Perutah

  1. There isn't a mitzvah to return an object worth less than a Perutah. [39] Therefore, one who finds such an item may leave it or keep it.[40]
  2. 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.[41]

Forfeiture

  1. 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.[42] That can happen in the following ways:
    1. The owner says explicitly that he has given up hope.[43] This is true even if the item has simanim.[44]
    2. Similarly, if it’s evident that the object has been lost for a long time such as if one sees moss or rust on the object, then it’s permissible to take and keep the object. [45] This is true even if the item has identifying simanim.[46]
    3. Also, if an item without identifying features is lost, a person does not expect to get it back. When he discovers that it is lost, he will give up on it and it will automatically be forfeited.[47] This isn't true in a place where there are talmidei chachamim.[48]
  2. There is a mitzvah to return a lost object to someone who passed away by returning it to the inheritors of a deceased person. [49]

Simanim

  1. 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. [50]
  2. The siman must be a unique feature and not a generic characteristic. [51]
    1. For example: a normal color, brand name, or stamp on the item with the company name are not unique features.[52] However, a crack on the side or if a part of the object broke off, those are unique features. [53]
  3. The amount, weight, or length is considered a Siman only if that’s unique and not if that item is normally sold or found in that standard amount, weight, or length. [54]
  4. Number of pieces found can be considered a siman.
    1. For example, “there were 6 keys on the key chain” or “there were 15 bills in the envelope” are considered unique features. [55] If it is just a standard amount, such as ten pens in a pack, that wouldn't qualify.[56]
  5. A unique wrapper, envelope, or basket is considered a siman on the item that is in it. [57] The way something is tied can also be a good siman.[58]
    1. An envelope from a local bank is not a siman, while a envelope from a foreign bank can be a siman. [59]
  6. An item that’s attached to the item can function as a siman such a tag. [60]
  7. The location where the item was placed is a siman. [61]
    1. The claimant must identify the specific location within the property and not just the general area or property where it was left. [62]
    2. If it is found on a public walkway, in all likelihood it has moved since it was lost and thus would not be a siman.[63]
    3. If it is found in a place where many people use such items, place would not be a siman. [64] For example, a towel left in the mikvah. [65]

Items without Simanim

  1. 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. [66] 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.[67] This is true even if one is not sure whether the owner was aware of the loss or not.[68]
  2. If you encounter an item with so Simanim, but you are not sure if the owner is aware of the loss, some poskim say that the finder doesn't have to pick it up.[69] Others say that the owner must pick it up and hold it until Eliyahu comes and discloses who the owner is.[70] Rav Moshe Feinstein explains that holding an item until Eliyahu comes does not literally mean you need to guard it forever, but rather after a long enough time (all three regalim) has passed and no one has claimed it, you can write down in a safe notebook the exact value of the item and all its attributes, and then use the item for yourself. If Eliyahu later tells you who the item belonged to based on the attributes and value, then you can pay the original owner.[71]
  3. There are certain factors which allow one to assume that the owner knows about his loss and if the object has no simanim it would be permissible to take:
    1. Heavy item (such as a hammer) - we presume that the owner knows that he lost it because when a heavy item falls you can sense it[72]
    2. Cash or other valuables- we can assume that the owner realized and forfeited his ownership because people checkx frequently. [73] According to many poskim, this is true even for small amounts of money.[74]
    3. If it’s evident that the item has been lost for a long time (it’s rusty or overgrown with mold) (there’s no fixed time because each situation and object is different, once one can be sure that the owner would have forfeited ownership one may take it) [75]
  4. 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. [76]
  5. 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.[77]

Lost Object of a non-Jew

  1. Technically, there’s no Mitzvah to return a lost object to a non-Jew, and some say that there’s a prohibition. [78] 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. [79] Additionally, all agree that if a Chilul Hashem will result then there’s an obligation to return the object. [80]
  2. An item that was lost in an area with mostly non-Jews, is presumed to belong to a non-Jew and may be kept.[81] Nevertheless, if a Jew proves that it is his, if one wishes to be upright and good, he should go beyond the letter of the law and give it back.[82]
  3. If circumstances indicate that the non-Jew placed or hid that item there it may not be taken.[83]
  4. A Jewish apikores would have the status of a non-Jew for this halacha.[84]

What to do with the Item until the Owner is Found

  1. In a case that there is an obligation to return an item, the Torah places the responsibility of safeguarding the lost item on the finder until he can identify the person who lost it.[85] This includes preserving its value.[86] For example, if he found a roll of film or a sefer, he may not store it in a moist place where it can get ruined.[87]
  2. If it is too difficult for the finder to watch it, he can pass it off to someone trustworthy to watch for him.[88]
  3. Once you pick up the item, you are responsible for its safekeeping. You cannot pick it up and place it down near where it was found, hoping that the owner will find it there.[89]
  4. There is a debate about the accountability of the finder. Therefore, the final halacha is that if the item got stolen or lost, the finder is exempt.[90] If he is negligent, and the item is lost, stolen or damaged, he is responsible to repay the original owner.[91]

Borrowing it for Personal Use

  1. The finder may not borrow the item that he finds for his own personal use.[92]

If the Finder Knows who the Owner is

  1. 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.[93]
  2. 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.[94]

The Obligation to Publicize

  1. When the item is found, the finder must try to locate its owner by publicizing it.[95]

How and Where?

  1. In a small area, the publicizing can typically be accomplished by a simple announcement, such as after tefilla in shul.[96]
  2. In a larger town, notices should be posted in the shuls adjacent to where it was found.[97] Additionally, notices should be posted in public places in the area such as the elevator in the building it was found.[98]
  3. The finder is not required to spend money in order to publicize the finding.[99]
  4. The notice should remain posted for long enough that most people in the area would have had a chance to see it. It is preferable to leave it up as long as possible[100]

What to Announce/Write on the Notice

  1. The notice should specify the type of item,[101] but not with enough detail to identify the Simanim that we would require the owner to identify in order to prove his ownership.[102]

Links

Sources

  1. Sefer Hachinuch Mitzva 538, Rambam Sefer Hamitzvot Mitzvot Aseh Mitzva 204, Sefer Mitzvot Hakatzar of the Chofetz Chaim of mitzvot that can be fulfilled today mitzva 69 in positive mitzvot. see the second perek of Masechet Bava Metzia and Rambam Hilchot Gezela chapters 11 and onward.
  2. Devarim 22:1, Rambam Gezela Va'aveda 11:1, Nimukei Yosef Baba Metzia 16a "Aseh", Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 141
  3. Devarim 22:3, Devarim 22:1, Rambam Gezela Va'aveda 11:1, Nimukei Yosef Baba Metzia 16a "Aseh"
    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.
  4. 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
  5. 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.
  6. Halachos of Others People’s Money by Rav Bodner, pg. 142 based on S”A 259:9
  7. Shu"t Igrot Moshe CM 2:22, cited by Halachos of Others People’s Money pg. 142
  8. Shulchan Aruch 259:9, Halachos of Others People’s Money pg. 142
  9. Halachos of Others People’s Money pg. 142
  10. Sefer Hachinuch Mitzva 538 based on Gemara Kiddushin 34a, Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 138
  11. 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.
  12. Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 157-158
  13. S”A C”M 263:1 based Rava's comment on Baba Metzia 30b, Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 158
  14. Mamon Yisrael (Halachos of Others People’s Money by Rav Bodner, pg. 158), S”A HaRav (Hilchot Metziah #37)
  15. S”A C”M 263:2
  16. S”A C”M 263:3
  17. 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.
  18. Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur S”A C”M 259,271 #4)
  19. Rosh Baba Metzia 2:28, Tosafot Baba Metzia 31b s.v. "Im", Tur and Shulchan Aruch C.M. 265:1, Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 181
  20. Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 182, Shu"T Teshuvot Vehanhagot 3:463
  21. Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 182
  22. The Mishna on Baba Metzia 33a states that his own lost item takes precedence over someone else's. This is codified by Shulchan Aruch C.M. 264:1. However, see Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 182 (based on Shulchan Aruch Harav Hilchot Metzia 33 that if the other person's item is worth more than his, and he feels certain that his friend will reimburse him for the loss he would incur in order to save that item, he is not permitted to save his own at the expense of his friend's.
  23. Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 183 based on Sma 264:1. However, he adds (based on SA Harav Hilchot Metzia 33) that if the finder feels certain that he will be reimbursed by the loser, he should spend the money.
  24. Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 183, Shulchan Aruch Harav Hilcot Metzia 33. see there note i-j where he adds based on Rav Moshe Feinstein that even if he will not lose any salary but his employer objects to his taking the time, he is exempt from the mitzva during work hours. If he can pick it up and return it after work hours, he must do so.
  25. Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 182
  26. Shulchan Aruch 260:9, Halachos of Others People’s Money pg. 144
  27. Halachos of Others People’s Money by Rav Bodner, pg. 144
  28. Rama 260:10 based on Baba Metzia 25b, Halachos of Others People’s Money pg. 145
  29. Rama and S”A C”M 260:9-10, Halachos of Others People’s Money pg. 145
  30. Halachos of Others People’s Money pg. 146
  31. Halachos of Others People’s Money pg. 146 based on Rama 260:10
  32. Halachos of Others People’s Money pg. 146
  33. Rama C”M 260:10, Mamon Yisrael (Halachos of Others People’s Money by Rav Bodner, pg. 147-8)
  34. Mamon Yisrael (Halachos of Others People’s Money by Rav Bodner, pg. 154-5)
  35. Baba Metzia 22a, Shulchan Aruch 259:7, Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 154
  36. Rosh Baba Metzia 2:2, Shulchan Aruch 259:7, Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 154
  37. Rama 259:7, Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 155
  38. Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur S”A C”M 259,271 #28)
  39. 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
  40. Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 149
  41. 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
  42. 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.
  43. 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
  44. Shulchan Aruch CM 262:5, Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 152
  45. S”A C”M 260:1 based on Gemara Baba Metzia 23b, Mamon Yisrael (Halachos of Others People’s Money by Rav Bodner, pg. 153). see there where he writes that Shulchan Aruch did not define the exact time because it will depend on the time, place and object, and adds that Pitchei Choshen 2:note 26 and Rav Elyashiv (cited in Hashavat Aveda Kehalacha 5: note 2) agree
  46. Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 153 note H. see there note J, 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
  47. Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 154
  48. Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 154
  49. 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.
  50. Mamon Yisrael (Halachos of Others People’s Money by Rav Bodner, pg. 154)
  51. 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.
  52. Mamon Yisrael (Halachos of Others People’s Money by Rav Bodner, pg. 160-1) based on Shach 267:2 who writes that we don't return an item by identifying the color. Aruch Hashulchan 262:5 explains that this is because there are many items that are of the same color
  53. Mamon Yisrael (Halachos of Others People’s Money by Rav Bodner, pg. 161) based on Rama 262:13 citing the Beit Yosef
  54. Mamon Yisrael (Halachos of Others People’s Money by Rav Bodner, pg. 161) based on Shulchan Aruch 262:3 and 267:7
  55. Mamon Yisrael (Halachos of Others People’s Money by Rav Bodner, pg. 161) based on Shulchan Aruch 262:3 from Baba Metzia 23b
  56. Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 161-162 based on Baba Metzia 23b
  57. S”A C”M 262:19-20 based on Baba Metzia 24b, Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 162
  58. Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 162 based on Shulchan Aruch 262:3 from Baba Metzia 23b
  59. Mamon Yisrael (Halachos of Others People’s Money by Rav Bodner, pg. 162)
  60. Mamon Yisrael (Halachos of Others People’s Money by Rav Bodner, pg. 163) based on S”A C”M 262:18 from Baba Metzia 27a
  61. S”A 262:3, 9 based on the opinion of Rava in Baba Metzia 22b, Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 163
  62. Mamon Yisrael (Halachos of Others People’s Money by Rav Bodner, pg. 163)
  63. Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 163 based on Shulchan Aruch 262:9
  64. Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 163 based on Rama 262:9 from Baba Metzia 23b
  65. Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 163, Shu"t Minchat Yitzchak 3:17
  66. 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
    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.
  67. Shulchan Aruch CM 262:3, Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 166.
  68. 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.
  69. Rav Elyashiv (cited in Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 170 note 117) based on Rabbi Akiva Eiger (Derush ViChiddush Baba Metzia 21b "Omnam Yesh Lomar"
  70. Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igros Moshe CM 2:45) and Chazon Ish (cited in Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 170 note 118) based on S"A Harav Hilchot Metzia Halacha 2
  71. Igros Moshe CM 2:45, at the end.
  72. S”A C”M 262:3 and 6 based on Baba Metzia 21b, Mamon Yisrael (Halachos of Others People’s Money by Rav Bodner, pg. 168)
  73. S”A CM 262:3 and 6 based on Baba Metzia 21b. see shulchanaruchharav.com
    Most poskim say that this assumption of Chazal is still applicable nowadays (even though we don't really see so many people constantly checking their pockets, including Mamon Yisrael (Halachos of Others People’s Money by Rav Bodner, pg. 168) citing Mishpat Aveidah (pg. 93) in the name of the Chazon Ish and Igrot Moshe Y”D 4:23.
  74. Shu"t Igrot Moshe YD 4:23, Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 169 in the name of Rav Nissin Karelitz and Rav Chaim Kanievsky. However, in note 114 he quotes Rav Elyashiv that a person would not become aware of losing a small amount of money, and therefore one would only be allowed to take a larger amount (50 shekel or more)
  75. S”A C”M 262:5, Mamon Yisrael (Halachos of Others People’s Money by Rav Bodner, pg. 153 note 45) quoting Pitchei Choshen (chapter 2 note 26) and Hashavat Aviedah KeHalacha (chapter 5 note 2) in the name of Rav Elyashiv
  76. Mamon Yisrael (Halachos of Others People’s Money by Rav Bodner, pg. 171-2) based on Shulchan Aruch CM 262:21
  77. 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.
  78. 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.
  79. 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 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 Ten Minute Halacha: Hashavas Aveida to a nochri by Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz
  80. S”A C”M 266:1
  81. Shulchan Aruch 259:3, Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 156
  82. Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 156-157 based on Shulchan Aruch 259:5
  83. Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 155 based on Netivot Hamishpat 260:4
  84. 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
  85. Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 173
  86. Rambam Gezela Va'aveda 13:11, Shulchan Aruch C.M. 267:18
  87. Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 176
  88. Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 174 based on Shulchan Aruch Harav Hilchot Metzia: 32. see also Ben Ish Chai Year 1: Parashat Ki Tavo: 7
  89. Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 174-175 in the name of Rav Moshe Feinstein
  90. The Gemara Baba Metzia 29a: Rabbah says that the finder is considered a Shomer Chinam (meaning exempt if the item is lost or stolen while in his possession and only responsible if it happens due to his negligence), while Rav Yosef says he is like a Shomer Sachar (meaning he is obligated to pay if the item gets lost or stolen). Shulchan Aruch C.M. 267:16 holds like Rav Yosef. The Rama there holds like Rabbah. The Sma 267:17 and Shach 267:14 write that this is a safek. Therefore, we would conclude that the finder doesn't have to pay for it. In order for the finder to be required to pay for the item that he found if it is lost or stolen, the original owner would have to prove that he is obligated.
  91. Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 175 based on Shulchan Aruch C.M. 267:16
  92. Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 176
  93. Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 177 based on the opinion of Rav Moshe Feinstein
  94. Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 177 based on Shulchan Aruch Choshen Mishpat 267:1
  95. Mishna Baba Metzia 27b, Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 178. For a discussion of how this can be accomplished in the modern age, perhaps via the internet, see Tzohar.org - מצוות השבת אבידה דרך האינטרנט
  96. Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 178. see Igros Moshe O.C. 5:9:8 that if you know that the person who lost it prays in a certain shul, it suffices to announce it in that shul
  97. Halachos of Other People's Money pg. pg. 178. Shu"t Igros Moshe OC 5:9:8 says that in a city like New York, one would have to announce it in the nearby shuls, where it would be possible that the owner of the lost object would come pray, but it wouldn't make sense to require that it be announced in every shul in New York City
  98. Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 179
  99. Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 179 based on a teshuva of Rav Moshe Feinstein
  100. Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 179 based on a teshuva of Rav Moshe Feinstein
  101. Shulchan Aruch 267:4 based on the opinion of Rav Nachman in Baba Metzia 28b
  102. Halachos of Other People's Money pg. 179