Related for Bava Metzia 11:19

ת"ש דההיא

would agree,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That the claimant is entitled to nothing, even if he is ready to swear. ');">¹⁷</span> for mere hanging on [to a disputed article] counts for nothing.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It constitutes no claim, and therefore the garment is not 'disputed money'. ');">¹⁸</span> If you deem it right to say that in the case of one [litigant] seizing it<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the garment. ');">¹⁹</span> in our presence, we take it away from him,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If R. Zera's question is to be answered in the sense that the litigant who has seized the garment must give up half the garment to the other claimant. ');">²⁰</span> [it is clear that] if he dedicates it [to the Temple]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Without seizing it. ');">²¹</span> the dedication does not take effect.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For the act of dedication cannot be more effective than the act of seizing it. ');">²²</span> But if you will say that in the case of one [litigant] seizing it in our presence we do not take it away from him, what would be the law if he dedicated it without seizing it? Seeing that a Master says [elsewhere],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. A.Z. 63a; cf. B.B. 133b. ');">²³</span> 'Dedication to the Most High by word of mouth is like delivery in a secular transaction', [do we say that the dedication of the garment] is like seizing it, or [do we say], 'After all, he has not seized it,' and it is written: And if a man shall sanctify his house to be holy, etc.,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXVII, 14. ');">²⁴</span> [from which we might conclude that] just as his house is in his possession so must everything [that he may wish to dedicate] be in his possession — which would exclude this case [of the garment which he has not seized and] is not in his possession? — Come and hear [the following]: There was

Tosefta Kiddushin