Take Ten for Talmud
1657BabaBasra23- Who owns this pigeon, majority wins
A very good morning, on behalf of Teach613, we welcome you to take 10-10 for Talmud. Baba Basra-Havkim, Baba Basra 23A pagination is 45, starting from the Mishnah, which is about 12 lines from the top. Marhikim esa shovach min ha'ir khamishim amor. A person has to distance a pigeon coop that he is creating from the city, 50 amos, distance from the city, because these pigeons are going to be eating the seeds that people plant, and that's considered doing damage to introduce a pigeon coop that close to the city. Likewise, valloyasah adam shovach besoch shaloh, you're not allowed to make a pigeon coop within your own area, alaim kangishilach hamishim amor lachuruach, unless the size of your estate is such that you have 50 amos in all directions so that when they go out to eat, they're not going to be going into someone else's area. Rabbi Huda Omehbe's abas kurim mala shagir ha'yona, you have to have an even greater distance based on their flight, the imlakho, but if you purchased it, the way it is, meaning it's been an established pigeon coop, a filabes rova ha'rego bhaskaso, even if it's fairly small, it's already considered to have a ha'zaka, this is the established relationship with the neighbors, and however it got established, but you're inheriting it like a grandfather clause and you're allowed to continue. Just as an aside, by Avraham's camels, we find Pashas Ha'yisara migumalai adonav, that the camels of Avraham were unique in that they were muzzled, as they went. They had their own food bag over their mouths, and they didn't just eat indiscriminately from other people's things. And over here, we have such an example regarding birds as to how far they should be distanced so that they don't eat from someone else's things. Let's move on to the mission at the beginning of Ahmed Bays, the mission estates, Niful, which is a young bird that does not yet fly, Hanimtso basochamishim amo, if it's found within 50 amos of a specific pigeon coop, parayous shabbalah shova, we assume we attribute this bird to the owner of this pigeon coop, and the halacha here is obviously with a different application than what we were doing a moment ago. This is not the distance the pigeon coop has to be done so that he doesn't do damage. This is a question of Haschava-saveda, to whom should this bird be returned? So the person who's within 50 amos, that's the distance that the bird hobbles, hops, and can be attributed to the owner of that pigeon coop. rut mikha amishim amo, if it's outside of ha'mishim amo, harayous sha mozo, whoever finds it can keep it, because it's not attributable anymore, because Hazal established that, I guess the wording would be the nature of these young birds, is that they don't hop beyond ha'mishim amo, 50 amo, from their home. And if you found it out of that region, then, oh, bets are off where this bird came from, but it didn't come from the pigeon coop that's nearby. nimtse bincheneschau vachos carvelosechalo, carvelosechalo, if you find it between two pigeon coops, so whichever one it's closer to, that's the one that gets it, merza a merza, if it's exactly half and half, shinayam yach locu, the owners of the two pigeon coops should divide it. Now, our Mishnah seemed to present that whichever one is closer is considered the owner. We assume that it emanated from the closer one. We have such a concept by Igla Arufa, where the body was found closer to a certain city, and we assume that the problem emanated from that city that's closest to the place where the tragedy was discovered. There is another way to attribute things, and that is the method of rove, majority. We have the concept of majority in a court system where we follow the majority of rulings in whichever way it goes, haiv or potter, obligated or absolved. This is obviously a different type of rove where attributing from where the thing came, and the one that has more pigeons would be the case here, would be the one that it probably came from, a concept of rove. Thaisvis points out that we have such a concept of majority by a piece of meat that was found and there are a certain number of kosher butcher shops, and there's one butcher shop that's not kosher, and there is a concept in the gumora of following the rove, the majority, to assume that it's kosher. Even though Thaisvis points out, it might have been found on the park bench right outside the non-coacher butcher shop, but still, if in the region the majority are kosher, then there's a concept of following the rove. The gumori indeed says, amarabih, amarabihanina, rove korov hokhen akhar horov. If you have a choice to attribute it based on majority, or based on which one is closer, a little bit like emotional circumstantial evidence, it's sitting right here in front of this, it's probably belonging to this, that's not true, we follow the rove, the majority of the region, things move, and what's the majority that could have brought it over to this place. And of course, if you're telling me that when there's a choice of majority versus closer, you follow majority, so then we have a problem from the ruling of our Mishnah that says, don't follow the pigeon coop that has more, follow the pigeon coop that's closer. Tanan, just about midway on the page at the end of a line, we learned. Nifal hannim tso besochamisham amor, this young bird that cannot yet fly, that was found within 50 amos of a specific pigeon coop, harayusha bal hashovach, it belongs to the owner of that pigeon coop, vahafagav di ikaharina de nafish minay, even though there are pigeon coops that have more than this pigeon coop, you told me the only criterion that I should keep track of is closer, there may be other pigeon coops that have more, so at first the Gomara answers bid de leka, there are no other pigeon coops that have more, it's a large pigeon coop. If you'll skip a few lines though, the Gomara says, khal hamidada ain amidada yosiminun, is a basic principle that a bird that's hopping will not go further than 50 amos from its home and that's what this ruling is based on and therefore, if it's close enough to be within 50 amos, that owner is going to get it and if there are two that qualify within 50 amos, then we're going to be assessing between the two of them. In Shochonara, simon rais sammerse if hess we indeed find, gozo, this bird that hops and is not yet able to fly, it's found khal rov le shovar besoch amishim amos close to a pigeon coop within 50 amos, then that owner is indeed going to get it, if it's out of the 50 amo range, then the person who finds it can keep it because it's not attributable anymore because the bird in our assessment, khal's assessment, does not go further than that from its home, ninta bain shovar hos, if it's between two coops, then we follow the closer one, bamed de verma murem, but that only applies if they are equal in their number of pigeons, avalam hoyo yone hoyo echad rabbin, but if one of them has more pigeons and they're both within the range of 50 amo, halo, acha, acha, rov, acha, pisha, rahok, you're going to follow the majority even if it's further, meaning one of them is very close, ten amos away, the other is 40 amos away, but if the 40 amo away one has more than it's attributable to that one, similar to the case that Tospus mentioned of the meat that's sitting right in front of the non-Kosha butcher shop, but overall it could have come from anywhere in the city and the majority is kosher, then that's how we're going to look at it. Yesha kohach, thank you for joining.