Rambam - 1 Chapter a Day

Whenever a person finds an article that appears to have been intentionally placed down, it is forbidden for him to touch it. This applies whether or not it has a mark by which it can be identified.

The rationale is that perhaps the owner of the article left it there until he returns. Thus, if the finder takes it he will have ill-treated the owner. If the article does not have a mark by which it can be identified, he has purposefully caused his colleague financial loss, for the article does not have a mark that will enable it to be identified and returned. Even if it has a mark, he has wronged him, for he has troubled him to search for the article and identify it by its marks. Therefore, it is forbidden for the finder to touch it, unless it appears to have fallen.

Even if the finder is in doubt and does not know whether the article was lost or placed down, he should not touch it. If he transgressed and took it, he is forbidden to return it to its place. If it is an article that does not have a mark by which it can be identified, the finder acquires it; he is not obligated to return it.

Whenever a person takes an article that can be identified with a mark, whether originally it had been placed down or had dropped, whether in a private domain or in the public domain, he is obligated to announce its discovery.

What is meant by an article that appears to have been intentionally placed down? If a person finds a donkey or a cow pasturing on the road during the day, or he finds a utensil buried in a garbage heap, he should not touch them, for Deuteronomy 22:1, the verse that commands the return of a lost object, speaks of an ox or a sheep "going astray" in the way.

If, however, he found a donkey with its gear overturned, a cow running through vineyards or a utensil lying openly in a garbage heap, it is considered a lost article. It should be taken and its discovery announced.

If one sees a donkey or a cow pasturing in an ordinary place and manner at night, the animal is considered lost.

If he saw the animal pasturing at twilight or at dawn for three consecutive days, it is considered a lost article; it should be taken and its discovery announced.

The following laws apply when a person sees a cow running down a road. If it is facing the city, it is not considered a lost article. If it is not facing the city, it is considered a lost article.

If a person finds a cow pasturing among the vineyards, he is obligated to return the animal to its owner because of the damage that will be done to the property.

Therefore, if the vineyards belong to a gentile, the animal is not considered lost and there is no obligation to return it. If he suspects that perhaps the gentile will kill the animal when he finds it because it spoiled his vineyard, it is considered a lost article; it should be taken and its discovery announced.

The following rules apply if a person finds a cow in the public domain. If it is found beyond the Sabbath limits of the city, he is obligated to return it. If it was pasturing in the grass or located in a barn that is neither a totally secure place nor one from where it will definitely flee, the finder should not touch it; this is not a lost article.

If he found a garment or an axe at the side of a wall, he should not touch them. If he found them in a thoroughfare, he should take them and announce their discovery. The same applies in all similar instances.

If a person finds young doves whose wings are tied together and they are hopping behind a stone wall, a wooden fence or in a lane in the fields, he should not touch them, since it is possible that their owner left them there. If, however, he takes them, they become his property.

If they were found tied with a unique knot that can serve as a mark of identification, the finder is obligated to announce their discovery. Similarly, if he found them located in a fixed place, he is obligated to announce their discovery, for the place where an object is discovered can serve as a mark of identification.

If a person finds a utensil buried in a garbage heap, he should not touch it, as mentioned above. If the garbage dump is not usually cleared away, and its owner decides to clear it away, he should take the utensil and announce its discovery, even though it is buried. If he discovers small utensils - e.g., a knife, a spit or the like - he should take them and announce their discovery, even though they were buried.

If a person finds scattered produce that appears to have been intentionally placed down, he should not touch it. If it appears that it has fallen, he may keep it.

Similarly, if he finds small sheaves of grain in the public domain, he may keep them, for they do not have a mark. The same applies if he finds cakes of pressed figs, a baker's loaves, a string of fish, pieces of meat, raw wool as it comes from the country, bundles of flax or stretches of purple wool, for they also do not have marks by which they can be identified.

If an item has a mark by which it can be identified, the finder should take it and announce its discovery. Although the mark will ultimately be worn off by trampling, it is still considered a valid mark of identification.

If, however, a person finds bread baked by an ordinary person, wool that has been dyed by a craftsman, jugs of wine or jugs of oil, he is obligated to announce their discovery, for all these articles possess distinctive marks by which they can be identified.

If, however, this occurs during the season when the stores of wine and oil are opened, the jugs belong to the finder even when the seal is marked. For all the jugs will be marked in the same fashion. The jugs will thus resemble loaves of bread coming from a baker, which all possess a standard shape and weight.

The following laws apply if a person finds small sheaves in a private domain: If it appears that they have fallen, he may keep them. If it appears that they have been intentionally placed there, he must announce their discovery.

The rationale is that although they do not have a mark by which they can be identified, the place where they are discovered can serve as a mark of identification, even though it is not a distinctive mark of identification.

If he finds large sheaves, whether in the private domain or in the public domain, he should take them and announce their discovery.

If a person finds a cake of pressed figs that contain a shard, a loaf of bread that contains a coin, a piece of meat that is cut in an abnormal fashion, a fish that has been bitten and any similar item, he is obligated to announce their discovery. The rationale is that they possess an abnormal factor, and we can assume that their owner did this only so that it would serve as a mark of identification.

The following rules apply when a person finds scattered fruit in the place of the grain heaps. If there was a measure approximately the size of a kav in a square four cubits by four cubits or in a larger area, it may be kept by the finder. The rationale is that the owners will no longer trouble themselves to collect it.

If the produce was scattered in a smaller space, a finder should not touch it, for perhaps it was intentionally left there by the owner.

Our Sages were in doubt with regard to the following situations: If half a kav was left in a square two cubits by two cubits, two kabbim in a square eight cubits by eight cubits, or a kav of two or three types of produce - e.g., dates, sesame seeds and pomegranates in a square four by four. Therefore, at the outset, one should not take such produce. If, however, one takes it, one is not obligated to announce its discovery.

A person who finds a collection of fruit, fruit in a container, or an empty container is obligated to announce the discovery of these objects.

If one finds a container with fruit in front of it, one may keep the fruit, but one must announce the discovery of the utensil. For it is likely that the utensil belongs to one person and the produce to another, and there is no mark by which to identify the produce. If it appears that the produce and the container belong to the same person, one must also announce the discovery of the produce.

What is implied? If the back of the container is facing the produce, he may keep the produce. If, however, the front of the container is facing the produce, we suspect that the produce fell from the container. Nevertheless, even in such a situation, if the container has a rim, and it is totally empty, the finder may keep the produce. For if it had fallen from the container, the rim would have caused something to remain. If some fruit were in the container and some were on the ground, the finder is obligated to announce the discovery of the entire amount.

When a person finds berries set out to dry in the road, even if he finds them next to a field of berries, they may be kept by the finder. Similarly, when a berry bush hangs over a road and berries are found under it, one is permitted to take them; the prohibition against robbery does not apply.

The rationale for these rulings is that a berry becomes repulsive when it falls in the dust. Such berries are considered ownerless, and thus there is no requirement that a tithe should be given. These concepts do not apply to olives, carobs and other similar fruit; they are forbidden to be taken by the finder.

Dates that are blown off a tree by the wind may be taken, for we assume that the owners forgo ownership over them in favor of anyone who finds them. If, however, they belong to orphans below the age of majority, they are forbidden to be taken, because a minor does not have the legal prerogative to waive his ownership over property.

Similarly, if the owner of the field takes care not to lose any of his produce and has surrounded the trees with a fence or put nets under the trees so that the fruit that drops should fall there until he gathers them, it is forbidden to take this fruit, for he has shown that he is not willing to forgo ownership.

A perverse cat that kills young children may not be kept by its owner. Hence, taking it from its owner is not considered robbery, nor is one obligated to return it, even though its hide has some worth. Instead, whoever finds it acquires it. He should kill it, and the hide belongs to him.

The following laws apply to a young dove that is found close to a dovecote. If it is found within 50 cubits of the dovecote, it belongs to the owner of the dovecote. If it is found beyond 50 cubits of the dovecote, it belongs to whoever finds it, for a young dove does not hop more than 50 cubits.

If a young dove is found between two dovecotes, it is granted to the owner of the closer one. If it is found midway between the two, its value should be divided.

When does the above apply? When there are an equal number of doves in each dovecote. But if there are more doves in one dovecote than another, we assume that it came from the majority, even though it is further away.