Commentary for Bava Metzia 42:2
בדבר שיש בו סימן כולי עלמא לא פליגי דלא הוי יאוש ואף על גב דשמעיניה דמיאש לסוף לא הוי יאוש דכי אתא לידיה באיסורא הוא דאתא לידיה דלכי ידע דנפל מיניה לא מיאש מימר אמר סימנא אית לי בגויה יהבנא סימנא ושקילנא ליה
but Raba maintains, it is an abandonment.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And the article belongs to the finder. ');"><sup>3</sup></span> [If the lost article is] a thing which has an identification mark, all agree that [the anticipation of its abandonment by the owner] is no abandonment, and even if in the end<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' After the article came into the hands of the finder. ');"><sup>4</sup></span>
Rashi on Bava Metzia
That he ultimately despairs (abandons it) - after this one finds it. And the principle of abandonment is such as when he says, "Woe is me for the monetary loss" - as he reveals his thinking that he has despaired about [reclaiming] them.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Tosafot on Bava Metzia
Because when it fell, he does not despair (abandon it) - And even though, he abandons it now, it is a general coincidence; and he was not prepared to abandon them as first.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Rashi on Bava Metzia
In a prohibited [manner] that it came into his possession - For it is something that is not prone to be abandoned.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy