for what

<<are they fit?

<<Oil

<<is fit

<<for leather-workers;

<<honey,

<<for the sores

<<of camels.

And the Sages

<<say:

<<he makes

<<for them

<<a remedy

<<and sells them

<<in court.

<<What

<<remedy

<<does he make

<<for them?

<<Rav Ashi said:

<<for the jars.

About what

<<do they disagree?

<<One master

<<holds:

<<for a loss

<<that is great

<<they were concerned;

<<for a loss

<<that is small

<<they were not

<<concerned.

<<And the other master

<<holds:

<<even

<<for a loss

<<that is small

<<also

<<they were concerned.

Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel

<<says:

<<he shall sell them

<<in court,

<<because

<<he is

<<like one who returns

<<a lost object

<<to the owner.

<<It was stated:

<<Rabbi Abba beRabbi Yaakov

<<said in the name of

<<Rabbi Yochanan:

<<the halachah

<<is like Rabban

<<Shimon

<<ben

<<Gamliel.

<<And Rava

<<said in the name of

<<Rav Nachman:

<<the halachah

<<is like the words of

<<the Sages.

But

<<said it

<<Rabbi Yochanan

<<one

<<time,

<<for Rabba bar bar Chana said in the name of Rabbi Yochanan:

<<every

<<place

<<that taught

<<Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel

<<in our Mishnah,

<<the halachah

<<is like him,

<<except for

<<the guarantor,

<<and Sidon,

<<and the proof

<<the last.

Amoraim

<<they are,

<<and according to

<<Rabbi Yochanan.

From Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel

<<we learn

<<that we bring down

<<a relative

<<to the property of

<<a captive.

<<From the Rabbis

<<we learn

<<that we do not

<<bring down

<<a relative

<<to the property of

<<a captive.

And from where?

<<Perhaps

<<thus far

<<did not

<<say

<<Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel

<<here

<<except

<<because

<<is being consumed

<<the principal;

<<but

<<there,

<<so too

<<we do not

<<bring down.

<<And thus far

<<did not

<<say

<<the Rabbis

<<here

<<except

<<either

<<like Rav Kahana

<<or

<<like Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak;

<<but

<<there,

<<so too

<<we bring down.

Is that to say

<<that two

<<reasons

<<they are?

<<But didn't Rav Yehuda say in the name of Shmuel:

<<the halachah

<<is like Rabban

<<Shimon

<<ben

<<Gamliel;

<<And Shmuel said:

<<we bring down

<<a relative

<<to the property of

<<a captive.

<<Is it not

<<because

<<one

<<reason

<<it is?

<<No,

<<two

<<reasons

<<they are.

So

<<too

<<it stands to reason,

<<for Rava said in the name of Rav Nachman:

<<the halachah

<<is like the words of

<<the Sages;

<<And Rav Nachman said:

<<we bring down

<<a relative

<<to the property of

<<a captive.

<<Rather,

<<learn from it:

<<two

<<reasons

<<they are.

<<Learn from it.

It was stated:

<<a captive

<<who was taken captive —

<<Rav

<<said:

<<we do not

<<bring down

<<a relative

<<to his property;

<<Shmuel

<<said:

<<we bring down

<<a relative

<<to his property.

Where they heard

<<of him

<<that he died,

<<everyone

<<does not

<<disagree

<<that we bring down.

When

<<they disagree,

<<where they did not

<<hear

<<of him

<<that he died.

<<Rav

<<said:

<<we do not

<<bring down,

<<perhaps

<<he will ruin

<<them.

<<And Shmuel

<<said:

<<we bring down;

<<since

<<said

<<the master

<<we assess

<<for him

<<as a sharecropper,

<<he will not

<<ruin

<<them.

They raised an objection:

<<Rabbi Eliezer

<<says:

<<from the implication

<<of what is said:

<<“And will burn

<<My anger

<<and I will kill

<<you” —

<<know

<<I

<<that their wives

<<are widows

<<and their children

<<orphans;

<<but

<<what

<<does the verse teach:

<<“And shall be

<<your wives

<<etc.”?

It teaches

<<that their wives

<<seek

<<to marry

<<and they do not

<<let

<<them,

<<and their children

<<want

<<to go down

<<to the property of

<<their father

<<and they do not

<<let

<<them.

<<Rava said:

<<to go down

<<and to sell

<<we learned.

There was

<<an incident

<<in Nehardea,

<<and resolved it

<<Rav Sheshes

<<from this

<<baraisa.

<<Rav Amram said to him:

<<perhaps

<<to go down

<<and to sell

<<we learned?

<<He said to him:

<<perhaps

<<from Pumbedisa

<<you are,

<<where they pass

<<an elephant

<<through the eye

<<of a needle?

<<But

<<similar to

<<their wives

<<[and their children]

<<it teaches:

<<just as

<<there

<<at all

<<not,

<<so

<<here

<<too

<<at all

<<not.

And “we bring down

<<a relative

<<to the property of

<<a captive”

<<a dispute of Tannaim

<<it is,

<<for it was taught:

<<one who goes down

<<to the property of

<<a captive —

<<they do not

<<remove

<<it

<<from his hand;

<<and not only that, but

<<even if

<<he heard

<<that they are approaching

<<and coming,

<<and he went ahead

<<and picked

<<and ate —

<<this one

<<is quick

<<and gains.

<<And these

<<are

<<the property of

<<captives:

<<behold,

<<where there was

<<his father

<<or

<<his brother

<<or

<<one

<<of

<<those who bequeath to him,

<<who went

<<off

<<overseas,

<<and they heard

<<of them

<<that he died.

One who goes down

<<to the property of

<<the abandoned —

<<they remove

<<it

<<from his hand.

<<And these

<<are

<<the property of

<<the abandoned:

<<behold,

<<where there was

<<his father

<<or

<<his brother

<<or

<<one

<<of

<<those who bequeath to him,

<<who went

<<off

<<overseas,

<<and they did not

<<hear

<<of them

<<that he died.

<<And Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said:

<<I heard

<<that the abandoned

<<are like captives.

One who goes down

<<to the property of

<<the forsaken —

<<they remove

<<it

<<from his hand.

<<And these

<<are

<<the property of

<<the forsaken:

<<behold,

<<where there was

<<his father

<<or

<<his brother

<<or

<<one

<<of

<<those who bequeath to him

<<here,

<<and he does not

<<know

<<to where

<<they went.

What is different about

<<those

<<that they call

<<them

<<“abandoned”,

<<and what is different about

<<these

<<that they call

<<them

<<“forsaken”?