They made

<<one who does not

<<acquire

<<like one who acquires.

<<What is the reason?

<<The poor

<<themselves

<<are content with it,

<<so that

<<when

<<they are hired

<<themselves

<<there may gather

<<their sons

<<after them.

And this disagrees with

<<Rabbi Chiya bar Abba,

<<for Rabbi Chiya bar Abba said in the name of Rabbi Yochanan:

<<not

<<“adult”

<<an adult

<<literally,

<<and not

<<“minor”

<<a minor

<<literally,

<<but

<<an adult

<<who depends

<<upon

<<the table of

<<his father —

<<this is

<<the “minor”;

<<a minor

<<who does not

<<depend

<<upon

<<the table of

<<his father —

<<this is

<<the “adult”.

“The find of

<<his slave

<<and his maidservant

<<who are Hebrew —

<<it is

<<their

<<own.”

<<Why?

<<Let him be

<<nothing

<<but

<<a laborer!

<<And it was taught:

<<the find of a laborer

<<is his own.

<<In what case was this said?

<<At a time

<<when he said

<<to him:

<<“weed

<<with me

<<today”,

<<“hoe

<<with me

<<today”.

But

<<if he said

<<to him

<<“do

<<with me

<<work

<<today” —

<<his find

<<belongs to the householder.

Rabbi Chiya bar Abba said in the name of Rabbi Yochanan:

<<here

<<with a slave

<<who drills

<<pearls

<<we are dealing,

<<whose

<<master

<<does not want

<<to divert him

<<to work

<<that is other.

Rava

<<said:

<<with one who lifts

<<a found object

<<along with

<<his work

<<we are dealing.

Rav Pappa

<<said:

<<such as

<<where he hired him

<<to gather

<<found objects.

<<And what is the case?

<<Where overflowed

<<a lake

<<with fish.

This

<<maidservant —

<<what is the case?

<<If

<<she has brought

<<two

<<hairs,

<<what

<<is she doing

<<with him?

And if

<<she has not

<<brought

<<two

<<hairs —

<<if

<<he is alive,

<<the father,

<<then her father's

<<she is!

<<And if

<<he is not alive,

<<the father,

<<let her go free

<<at the death of

<<the father.

For Reish Lakish said:

<<a Hebrew

<<maidservant

<<acquires

<<herself

<<at the death of

<<the father

<<from the authority of

<<the master,

<<by an a fortiori inference.

<<And was not

<<refuted

<<Reish Lakish?

Let us say

<<from this

<<too

<<let there be

<<a refutation!

No,

<<actually

<<he is alive,

<<the father,

<<and what is

<<“behold

<<they

<<are theirs”?

<<To exclude

<<the view of Rabbah.

“The find of

<<his wife”.

<<If he divorced her —

<<it is obvious!

Here with what are we dealing?

<<With one divorced

<<and not

<<divorced,

<<for Rabbi Zeira said in the name of Shmuel:

<<every

<<place

<<where said

<<the Sages

<<“divorced

<<and not

<<divorced” —

<<her husband

<<is liable

<<for her maintenance.

What is the reason

<<that said

<<the Rabbis

<<the find of

<<a woman

<<is her husband's?

<<so that

<<there not

<<be

<<for her

<<enmity.

<<Here

<<she has

<<enmity

<<upon enmity.

MISHNAH:

<<If he found

<<documents of

<<debt —

<<if

<<there is

<<in them

<<a lien on

<<property

<<he may not

<<return them,

<<for the court

<<collects

<<with them.

<<If there is not

<<in them

<<a lien on

<<property

<<he may return them,

<<for not

<<does the court

<<collect

<<with them —

<<the words of

<<Rabbi Meir.

And the Sages

<<say:

<<whether

<<this way

<<or

<<that way

<<he may not

<<return them,

<<because

<<the court

<<collects

<<with them.

GEMARA:

<<With what are we dealing?

<<If you say

<<where the debtor

<<admits —

<<when

<<there is

<<in them

<<a lien on

<<property

<<why

<<may he not

<<return them?

<<He

<<admits!

<<And if

<<where does not

<<the debtor

<<admit —

<<when

<<there is not

<<in them

<<a lien on

<<property

<<why

<<may he return them?

<<Granted

<<that he does not

<<collect

<<from liened property,

<<from unencumbered

<<property

<<collect

<<he does!

Actually

<<where the debtor

<<admits,

<<and here

<<this is the reason:

<<that we are concerned

<<lest

<<he wrote it

<<to borrow

<<in Nisan

<<and did not

<<borrow

<<until

<<Tishrei,

<<and he will come

<<to seize from

<<purchasers

<<not

<<lawfully.

If so,

<<all

<<documents

<<that come

<<before us

<<let us suspect

<<of them

<<thus!

All

<<documents

<<are not

<<impaired;

<<these

<<are impaired.

But

<<this

<<that we learned:

<<they write

<<a document

<<for the borrower

<<even though

<<that there is not

<<a lender

<<with him —

<<from the outset

<<how

<<do we write?

<<Let us suspect

<<lest

<<he wrote it

<<to borrow

<<in Nisan

<<and did not

<<borrow

<<until

<<Tishrei,

<<and he will come

<<to seize from

<<purchasers

<<not

<<lawfully!

Rav Asi said: