web analytics
April 19, 2015 / 30 Nisan, 5775
At a Glance
Judaism
Sponsored Post


Home » Judaism » Parsha »

Returning A Non-Jew’s Lost Item

Taste-of-Lomdus-logo

In this week’s parshah, Yosef is the ruler of Mitzrayim and his brothers come to purchase food from him, not realizing with whom they were dealing. On the return from their first trip to Mitzrayim, Yosef’s brothers realized that the money that they paid for their food was returned to them in their sacks of food. Immediately upon their return to Mitzrayim, they were sure that they would be reprimanded for not having paid for their purchased food.

So they confessed to Yosef, and explained to him that they had brought back the money intended for the first acquisition in addition to the money they intended to use to purchase more food. Yosef assured them that everything was okay and that their God and the God of their father must have gifted them by placing money in their sacks. Keep the money, he told them.

The Ohr HaChaim explains Yosef’s response. He says that Yosef was telling his brothers that some other person must have placed the money in their sacks, and that Hashem gave it to them by means of yiush ba’alim (the owner relinquishing his ownership). He was also saying to them that bnei Noach are not commanded to return a lost object that they find.

The Gemara in Sanhedrin 76b says that one is not allowed to return a lost item to a non-Jew. The Gemara speaks very harshly of one who does this. The Rambam (Hilchos Gezeilah 11:3) codifies this prohibition, but adds that it is praiseworthy to return the item if this will make a Kiddush Hashem. Perhaps Yosef’s brothers felt that returning the money would create a Kiddush Hashem, and therefore decided to return the money. Alternatively, they may have felt that if they did not return the money they would be penalized – and perhaps even killed.

Some have asked why the Ohr Hachaim felt it necessary to write that Yosef’s brothers could keep the money due to yiush ba’alim. Why would it not suffice to say that bnei Noach are not commanded to return a lost object that they find?

The Bach (Yoreh De’ah 266) explains that although one may keep a found lost item that belonged to a non-Jew, nonetheless the item still belongs to the non-Jew. The finder does not become the item’s new owner even though he is not obligated to return it. But if the non-Jew had relinquished his ownership before the item was found, the finder would be allowed to keep it.

This is in fact a machlokes. The Machaneh Efraim (Hilchos Gezeilah, siman 31) disagrees with the Bach, saying that one acquires a non-Jew’s lost item when he picks it up – even before he relinquishes ownership.

According to the Bach, perhaps the reason why the Ohr Hachaim says that Yosef told his brothers that the owner had relinquished ownership was because the brothers otherwise would have felt that the money was not theirs to keep. Even though they did not have to return the money, they would not have acquired it. Therefore Yosef assured them that the owner had already relinquished ownership.

If this is so, why did the Ohr Hachayim have to write that the bnei Noach are not commanded to return a found lost object? It would have sufficed to write that the owner has already relinquished ownership.

Perhaps the reason for this is because the Ramban, in Baba Metzia (Milchamos Hashem 26b), explains that when one finds a lost object he becomes a shomer over the object until it is returned to its owner. Whenever one is guarding an object for another we consider the object to be in the domain of the owner. When an object is in its owner’s domain he cannot relinquish ownership. Ownership can only be relinquished when an item is lost; when it is in his domain it is not considered lost and thus he cannot relinquish his ownership. Consequently, if one finds a lost object before the owner relinquishes his ownership, he must still return the object.

Yet since there is no obligation to return a lost object to a non-Jew, the one who finds it will not become a shomer for the non-Jew. Therefore, even if the non-Jew relinquishes his ownership after the object is found, the finder is permitted to keep the object. It is for this reason that the Ohr Hachaim added that bnei Noach are not commanded to return a lost object that they find. It is this fact that permits one to keep a non-Jew’s lost item, even if the non-Jew only relinquished his ownership after the item was found.

About the Author: For questions or comments, e-mail RabbiRFuchs@gmail.com.


If you don't see your comment after publishing it, refresh the page.

Our comments section is intended for meaningful responses and debates in a civilized manner. We ask that you respect the fact that we are a religious Jewish website and avoid inappropriate language at all cost.

If you promote any foreign religions, gods or messiahs, lies about Israel, anti-Semitism, or advocate violence (except against terrorists), your permission to comment may be revoked.

2 Responses to “Returning A Non-Jew’s Lost Item”

  1. Yechiel Baum says:

    It should not be returned to a non-Jew since non-Jewish leaders have stolen Jewish property and stores them in their churches and mosques and temples so lets do an exchange or swap?

  2. Ed says:

    It is disappointing that the article omitted any reference to the meiri’s comment to Bava Kamma קיגb. There is no question that a Jew, who is light upon all nations, should do a kiddush Hashem and return the item.

Comments are closed.

Current Top Story
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu reviews details of a "bad deal" with Iran.
Netanyahu Warns of Increased Iran Aggression in Middle East
Latest Judaism Stories
Hertzberg-041715

Lincoln was not a perfect man. But he rose above his imperfections to do what he thought was right not matter the obstacles.

Arch of Titus

Adon Olam: An Erev Shabbat Musical Interlude Courtesy of David Herman

Daf-Yomi-logo

Oh My, It’s Copper!
‘…And One Who Is A Coppersmith’
(Kethubboth 77a)

Grunfeld-Raphael-logo

The omer sacrifice of loose barley flour was more fitting for animal consumption than human consumption and symbolizes the depths to which the Jewish slaves had sunk.

Question: If Abraham was commanded to circumcise his descendants on the eighth day, why do Arabs – who claim to descend from Abraham through Yishmael – wait until their children are 13 to circumcise them? I am aware that this is a matter of little consequence to our people. Nevertheless, this inconsistency is one that piques my curiosity.

M. Goldman
(Via E-mail)

When Chazal call not eating treif food a chok, that refers to how it functions.

His mother called “Yoni, Yoni!” Her eyes, a moment earlier dark with pain, shone with joy and hope

Kashrut reminds us that in the end, God is the arbiter of right and wrong.

In a cab with Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach & Rav Elayshiv discussing if/when to say tefillas haderech

The successful student listens more than speaks out; wants his ideas critiqued, not just appreciated

Why would it not be sufficient to simply state lehoros from which we derive that in such a state one may not issue any psak?

What do we learn about overcoming loss from the argument between Moses and Aaron’s remaining 2 sons?

Each of the unique roles attributed to Moshe share the common theme that they require of and grant higher sanctity to the individual filling the role.

Because of the way the piece of my finger had been severed, the doctors at the hospital were not able to reattach it. They told me I’d have to see a specialist.

“The problem is that the sum total is listed is $17,000. However, when you add the sums mentioned, it is clear that the total of $17,000 is an error. Thus, Mr. Broyer owes me $18,000, not $17,000.”

More Articles from Rabbi Raphael Fuchs
Taste-of-Lomdus-logo

Why would it not be sufficient to simply state lehoros from which we derive that in such a state one may not issue any psak?

Taste-of-Lomdus-logo

The Netziv answered that there is a difference between a piece of bread that was cut already in front of you, and one that was cut from beforehand.

Why is it necessary to invite people to eat from the korban Pesach?

The Ran asks why the Gemara concludes that since we are unsure which two of the four we must recline for, that we must recline for all four.

The Chasam Sofer answers that one of only prohibited from wearing a garment that contains shatnez if he does so while wearing the garment for pleasure purposes.

The Aruch Laner asks: How can Rashi say that the third Beis Hamikdash will descend as fire from heaven when every Jew prays several times a day for the rebuilding of the Beis Hamikdash?

The Ohr Hachayim rules that one may not manipulate the system; rather he must state his opinion as he see the ruling in the case; not as he would like the outcome of the verdict to become.

He suggests that the general admonition only dictates that a father may not actively enable his son to perform an aveirah.

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/judaism/parsha/returning-a-non-jews-lost-item/2013/11/27/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: