Bava Kamma 10:10 - Bava Metzia 1:1

מוכין שהכובס מוציא – from the white matter of the wool, he removes from the wool a small thing through rinsing with cold water.

הרי אלו שלו – for the [house] holder is not stringent, but if he had been stringent, he did not mind that it should be exactly as he wanted it (i.e., he had no legal objection).

ושהמורק מוציא – He who combs the wool and hatchels it, what he removes is an important matter, and they are regularly strict.

הכובס נוטל שלשה חוטים – it is the manner of wool garments to leave at the end of their weaving three threads from a different kind. And the washer/launderer takes them and harmonizes the garment and beautifies it. But if there are black threads woven into a white garment, the washer is permitted to take everything because the black in a white [garment] puts it to shame the most.

החייט ששייר מן החוט כדי לתפור בו – which is as long as the needle.

והמטלית שהיא שלש על שלש – we have the reading חייט/tailor who evened his stitches and trimmed from it a small patch three fingers by three fingers, he is liable to return it to the owner of the garment.

מעצד – a utensil/tool that a carpenter uses to smooth the face of the board and the chips that he removes are thin.

כשיל – a hatchet/spade that removes the large chips.

אצל בעל הבית – as a day [paid] laborer.

אף הנסורת – extremely thin [sawdust] that is under the borer which are very thin belong to the owner of the house.

שנים אוחזין בטלית – In the Gemara (Bava Metzia 7a), it maintains our Mishnah [deals with the case] such as one of them grabs hold of threads that are at the border of the garment from this side, and another grabs hold of threads that at the border of the of the garment from that side, but if they were cleaving to the garment itself, this one takes up until the place where hand reaches and that one takes up the place where his hand reaches, and the rest they would divide equally. , and through an oath.

זה אומר כולה שלי – I purchased it and/or it was sold to me by the seller and not to you. And when the seller sold [it] to one of them and took the money from both of them, one of them with his knowledge and the other one against his will, and he (i.e., the seller) does not know which one was with his knowledge and which one was against his will. For if he had known, and he would have said: “to this one, I sold [it].” There would be here one witness. And the one opposite him would be liable for an oath from the Torah, to contradict the witness. But now that he does not know, both are sworn to this oath that is mentioned in our Mishnah. And by law, they would divide [the garment] without an oath, but the Sages enacted that neither of them at all can take it without an oath, in order that everyone wouldn’t go and seize the garment of his fellow and say, “it is mine.” And it was necessary for the Tanna [of our Mishnah] to teach us that when this one says, “I found it, “that is through [an act of] finding it, and the other who says, “it is all mine,” that is through a commercial transaction. For had the Tanna [of our Mishnah] [only taught] a found object, I might think that it is through a found object [only] that the Rabbis imposed an oath, because they have taught a leniency to grab hold [of the corner of the object] inappropriately, so that my fellow would not have nothing missing in it, I will go and grab hold of it and divide it in public, but [regarding] a commercial transaction, if he had no need for it, he would not go after it to purchase it, and the person who comes to divide it with him and give him half of its monetary value, which is inappropriate, causing him loss and that is not to say that he is teaching that it is permitted to do so. I would say that the Rabbis did not impose upon him an oath. But if [the Mishnah] only taught about commercial transactions, I would say that is only upon commercial transactions that the Rabbis imposed upon him an oath because they are teaching a leniency and he [would] say, my fellow gives me money and I give money, now it is necessary for me, I will take it, and my fellow will have to trouble himself to go and purchase another one. But, regarding a found object, where you don’t have to say this, I would say, no, hence, it is necessary [for the Mishnah to teach both about found objects and commercial transactions].

ישבע שאין לו בה פחות מחציה – but he would not be sworn to an oath [saying] “it is all his,” as he would claim from the outset. For all of it would not be given to him. But if from when he claimed that half of it was his that it should be given to him, he would weaken his position from his first statement – when he said that it was all his. Therefore, he takes an oath that he does not have any less than half, which implies by this – that all of it is mine, as he had said initially; but according to your words, where you do not believe me regarding all of it, [I am taking] an oath that I have [a stake] in it and I have no less than one-half.