משנה: אֵי זוֹ הִיא אֲבֵידָה. מָצָא חֲמוֹר אוֹ פָרָה רוֹעִין בַּדֶּרֶךְ אֵין זוֹ אֲבֵידָה. חֲמוֹר וְכֵלָיו הֲפוּכִין וּפָרָה רָצָה בֵּין הַכְּרָמִים הֲרֵי זוֹ אֲבֵידָה. הֶחֱזִירָהּ וּבָֽרְחָה הֶחֱזִירָהּ וּבָֽרְחָה אֲפִילוּ אַרְבָּעָה וַחֲמִשָּׁה פְעָמִים חַייָב לְהַחֲזִירָהּ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר הָשֵׁב תְּשִׁיבֵם. הָיָה בָטֵל מִסֶּלַע לֹא יֹאמַר לוֹ תֶּן לִי סֶלַע אֶלָּא נוֹתֵן לוֹ שְׂכָרוֹ כְפוֹעֵל בָּטֵל. אִם יֵשׁ בֵּית דִּין מַתְנֶה עִמּוֹ בִּפְנֵי בֵּית דִּין. אִם אֵין שָׁם בֵּית דִּין בִּפְנֵי מִי מַתְנֶה. שֶׁלּוֹ קוֹדֵם. מְצָאָהּ בָּרֶפֶת אֵינוֹ חַייָב בָּהּ. בִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים חַייָב בָּהּ. הָֽיְתָה בֵין הַקְּבָרוֹת אַל יִטַּמֵּא לוֹ. אִם אָמַר לוֹ אָבִיו הִיטַּמֵּא אוֹ שֶׁאָמַר לוֹ אַל תַּחֲזִיר לֹא יִשְׁמַע לוֹ. פִּירֵק וְטָעַן פִּירֵק וְטָעַן אֲפִילוּ אַרְבָּעָה וַחֲמִשָּׁה פְעָמִים חַייָב שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר עָזוֹב תַּעֲזוֹב. הָלַךְ וְיָשַׁב לוֹ וְאָמַר הוֹאִיל וְעָלֶיךָ מִצְוָה אִם רָצִיתָה לִפְרוֹק פְּרוֹק פָּטוּר שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר עִמּוֹ. הָיָה חוֹלֶה אוֹ זָקֵן חַייָב. מִצְוָה מִן הַתּוֹרָה לִפְרוֹק אֲבָל לֹא לִטְעוֹן. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר אַף לִטְעוֹן. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגָּלִילִי אוֹמֵר אִם הָיָה עָלָיו יוֹתֵר מִמַּשּׂוֹאוֹ אֵינוֹ זָקוּק לוֹ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר תַּחַת מַשָּׂאוֹ מַשּׂאוּי שֶׁהוּא יָכוֹל לַעֲמוֹד בּוֹ. MISHNAH: What is a lost animal¹⁰⁹The Mishnah refers to Deuteronomy.22.1">Deut. 22:1 and Exodus.23.4">Ex. 23:4 which state the duty to return straying animals to their owners.? If he found a donkey or a cow grazing on the road¹¹⁰Even if no person was near watching the animal., this is no lost animal. A donkey whose gear is upside-down or a cow running in a vineyard are lost animals. If he returned it but it ran away, returned it but it ran away even four or five times, he is obligated to return it since it is said¹¹¹Deuteronomy.22.1">Deut. 22:1. The infinitive construction is regularly interpreted as implying repetition; cf. Sifry Deut. 222.: “Return it returning.” If he was losing time worth a tetradrachma¹¹²If the person finding the animal is highly paid and his time is worth much more than that of an agricultural hired hand, the question arises whether he can be forced to miss his lucrative trade in order to return a stray animal., he cannot say, give me a tetradrachma but [the owner] may pay him at the rate of an unemployed worker. If there is a court¹¹³According to Rashi, this may be an ad hoc court composed of three of the finder’s acquaintances who can empower him to charge full compensation for his time. Since the Yerushalmi does not discuss the Mishnah, its position cannot be ascertained., he can stipulate with him¹¹⁴This word is also in Alfasi’s text but only in one ms. of the Babli. R. Yosef Ḥabiba (Nimmuqe Yosef) in his commentary to Alfasi points out that the word makes no sense since the finder’s obligation already has terminated if the animal’s owner is around. before the court. If there is no court, before whom could he stipulate? His own comes first¹¹⁵There is no obligation to incur monetary loss in following Deuteronomy.22.1">Deut. 22:1..
¹¹⁶This is a continuation of Mishnah 11. On the owner’s property, no animal is staying. If one found it in the cow-shed, he has no obligation; in the public domain he is obligated. But if it was between graves, he¹¹⁷If the possible helper was a Cohen. may not defile himself. If his father told him to defile himself, or told him not to return it, he should not listen to him¹¹⁸Since both son and father are required to follow God’s commandments, if the father commands not to obey God, he must be disobeyed (Mekhilta dR. Ismael, Neziqin Chapter 20; ed. Horovitz-Rabin p. 325.). ¹¹⁹Here begins the rabbinic interpretation of Exodus.23.5">Ex. 23:5. If he unloaded and loaded, unloaded and loaded even four or five times, he is obligated since it is said: “restoring restore”¹²⁰Exodus.23.5">Ex. 23:5; in rabbinic interpretation, the root here is עזב II. Ibn Ezra in both his commentaries ad loc. calls this “far fetched”. Onqelos, Pseudo-Jonathan, and Saadia translate as if it were written twice, first עזב I “abandon”, then עזב II “put in good order.” This may be a pun intended in the biblical text.. If he¹²¹The owner of a animal which stumbled. sat down and said, since it is your¹²²The person who comes to help. Mekhilta dR. Simeon ben Iohai, p. 215. religious obligation, if you want to unload, unload, he¹²²The person who comes to help. Mekhilta dR. Simeon ben Iohai, p. 215. is free since it is said: “with him”. It is a religious obligation to unload, but not to load; Rebbi Simeon says, also to load¹²³Implied by the parallel Deuteronomy.22.4">Deut.22:4: “uplifting you shall uplift with him.” Mekhilta dR. Ismael, Neziqin 20 (p. 326); Sifry Deut. 225.. Rebbi Yose the Galilean said, if the load was more than the ordinary, he need not do anything since it is said: “under its load,” a load which it can carry¹²⁴Mekhilta dR. Ismael, Neziqin 20 (p. 325)..

הלכה: אֵי זוֹ הִיא אֲבֵידָה כול׳. מָצָא בָּרֶפֶת אֵין חַייָב בָּהּ. בִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים חַייָב. בֵּין הַקְּבָרוֹת אַל יִטַּמֵּא. אָמַר לוֹ אָבִיו. הִיטַּמֵּא. אוֹ שֶׁאָמַר לוֹ אָבִיו. אַל תַּחֲזִיר. אַל יִשְׁמַע לוֹ. בְּכָל אָתָר אַתָּ מַר. מִצְוַת עֲשֵׂה קוֹדֶמֶת לְמִצְוַת לֹא תַעֲשֶׂה. וָכָא אַתְּ אָמַר. אֵין מִצְוַת עֲשֵׂה קוֹדֶמֶת לְמִצְוַת לֹא תַעֲשֶׂה. שַׁנְייָא הִיא שֶׁהוּא וְאָבִיו חַייָבִין בִּכְבוֹד הַמָּקוֹם. HALAKHAH: “What is a lost animal,” etc. “If one found it in the cowshed, he has no obligation; in the public domain he is obligated. Between graves, he may not defile himself. If his father told him to defile himself, or told him not to return it, he should not listen to him.” Everywhere you say that a positive commandment has precedence over a prohibition, but here, you say that a positive commandment does not have precedence over a prohibition¹²⁵The positive commandment is to honor father and mother, to fear mother and father. The obligation to help with a fallen animal is formulated as a prohibition: one is forbidden to be oblivious of the animal’s pain; the Cohen is forbidden to enter a cemetary. Therefore, why should the father’s command not be obeyed in preference to obeying biblical prohibitions.? There is a difference since both he and his father are required to honor the Omnipresent^118,Since both son and father are required to follow God’s commandments, if the father commands not to obey God, he must be disobeyed (Mekhilta dR. Ismael, Neziqin Chapter 20; ed. Horovitz-Rabin p. 325.)¹²⁶In the Babli, 32a, this is explained as direct obligation formulated in Leviticus.19.3">Lev. 19:3..

תַּנֵּי. רוֹבֵץ וְלֹא רָבְצָן. וְחָזַר תַּנֵּי. פּוֹרֵק עִמּוֹ אֲפִילוּ מֵאָה פְעָמִים בַּיּוֹם. הֵן דְּתֵימַר. רוֹבֵץ וְלֹא רָבְצָן. בְּהַהוּא דְמַפִּיל גַּרְמֵיהּ. וְהֵן דְּתֵימַר. פּוֹרֵק עִמּוֹ אֲפִילוּ מֵאָה פְעָמִים. בְּהַהוּא דְאָנִיס. It was stated: “Lying down” but not one which habitually lies down¹²⁷Mekhilta dR. Ismael, Neziqin 20 (p. 325); Babli 33a.
It has been noted by modern Bible commentators that רבץ (Accadic rabaṣu, Arabic ربض) describes an animal resting comfortably on its knees and that, therefore, Exodus.23.5">Ex. 23:5 is an exhortation not to be a busybody offering help when it is not needed, whereas Deuteronomy.22.4">Deut. 22:4 is the obligation to help where it is needed. The problem with this interpretation is that it does not fit the general context of the Chapter in Ex. Therefore, the rabbinic interpretation is preferable which essentially treats all words in Exodus.23.5">Ex. 23:5 as ambiguous.. But then it was stated: “He unloads with him even a hundred times^127*Tosephta 2:24. in a day.” When you said, “lying down” rather than one which habitually lies down, about one which lies down by himself. When you said, “he unloads with him even a hundred times,” in an accident.

כִּי תִּפְגַּע. יָכוֹל פְּגִיעָה מַמָּשׁ. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר. כִּי תִרְאֶה. אִי כִּי תִרְאֶה יָכוֹל אֲפִילוּ רָחוֹק מֵאָה מִיל. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר. כִּי תִּפְגַּע. הָא כֵיצַד. שִׁיעֲרוּ חֲכָמִים אֶחָד מִשִּׁבְעָה וּמֶחֱצָה בְמִיל. וְזֶהוּ רִיס. עֲזוֹב תַּעֲזוֹב זוֹ פְרִיקָה. הָקֵם תָּקִים זוֹ טְעִינָה. רִבִּי שִמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי אוֹמֵר. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁפּוֹרְקוֹ מִן הַתּוֹרָה כָּךְ טוֹעֲנוֹ מִן הַתּוֹרָה. חֲמוֹר יִשְׂרָאֵל וּמַשּׂאוּי שֶׁלְּגוֹי דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל פּוֹרֵק וְטוֹעֵן. חֲמוֹר גּוֹי וּמַשּׂאוּי שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל. כְּדִבְרֵי חַכָמִים לֹא פוֹרֵק וְלֹא טוֹעֵן. כְּדִבְרֵי רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן פּוֹרֵק וְלֹא טוֹעֵן. ¹²⁸Babli 32a; Mekhilta dR. Ismael Neziqin 20 p. 323, dR. Simeon bar Ioḥai p. 215, Sifry Deut. 222, Midrash Tannaїm (Midrash Haggadol) 22:4.“if you hit upon.¹²⁹Exodus.23.5">Ex. 23:5.” I could think, really if you hit upon him; the verse says, “if you see.¹³⁰Deuteronomy.22.4">Deut. 22:4.” Concerning “if you see,” I could think even at a distance of a hundred¹³¹E has מלוא מיל “a full mil”, which for practical purposes is as impossible as 100 mil. mil? The verse says, “if you hit upon.” How is this? The Sages estimated one in 7 1/2 of a mil, i. e., a stadion¹³¹E has מלוא מיל “a full mil”, which for practical purposes is as impossible as 100 mil.. ¹²⁸Babli 32a; Mekhilta dR. Ismael Neziqin 20 p. 323, dR. Simeon bar Ioḥai p. 215, Sifry Deut. 222, Midrash Tannaїm (Midrash Haggadol) 22:4. Putting in order you shall put in order,¹²⁹Exodus.23.5">Ex. 23:5.” this is unloading. “Uplifting you shall uplift,¹³⁰Deuteronomy.22.4">Deut. 22:4.” this is loading. Rebbi Simeon ben Ioḥai says, just as his unloading is [an obligation] from the Torah, so his loading is from the Torah¹³³Whereas for the Sages he may ask to be paid for helping in loading; cf. Bava Metzia 2:10:4" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Bava_Metzia.2.10.4">Note 134.. ¹³⁴Babli 32b; other sources cf. Bava Metzia 2:10:4" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Bava_Metzia.2.10.4">Note 128. If the donkey was a Jew’s but the load a Gentile’s, everybody says that he unloads and loads. If the donkey was a Gentile’s but the load a Jew’s, according to the Sages one neither unloads nor loads. According to Rebbi Simeon one unloads but does not load.