Yeshiva Beit Midrash
Beit Midrash
- Sections
- Chemdat Yamim
- Bemare Habazak - Rabbis Questions
Answer: We understand that you are asking only out of halachic "curiosity," which allows us to answer you. Nevertheless, since you have not relayed potentially impactful details that are likely difficult to determine, our answer is quite general. We will take a quick look at a few scenarios and halachic concepts.
Aveida mida’at: The gemara, in a few places excludes from the mitzva of hashavat aveida (returning lost objects) an object that is an aveida mida’at (when the object is in a precarious situation and its owner does not act to protect it). The Tur (Choshen Mishpat 261) says that in such a case, the object is presumed to be hefker, whereas the Rambam (Gezeila 11:11) says that while hashavat aveida does not apply, the owner still owns it, so that it is forbidden for others to take it. The Shulchan Aruch (CM 261:4) rules like the Rambam, and the Rama (ad loc.) cites the Tur. The fact that some gemarot imply one way and others the other way (see Bava Batra 87b and Bava Matzia 21a) provides impetus for poskim to make distinctions. Thus, each side in the machloket can agree with the other side in exceptional cases (see Encyclopedia Talmudit, s.v. aveida mida’at).
One of the gemara’s cases of aveida mida’at (Bava Metzia 31a) is similar to our case. Reuven’s cow was grazing in a (non-Jewish) vineyard, and the vineyard owner warned Reuven that if this persisted, he would kill the cow. The gemara says that if Reuven ignored the warning, it is aveida mida’at, and it is likely that the machloket of the Rambam and Tur applies here (see Even Ha’ezel Gezeila 11:11). Most explain that whether it is hefker depends on the assumptions about the object owner’s mindset (see Beit Yosef, CM 261), which would make it dependent on the specific case. In our case, too, contractors ignore the warning of having their materials confiscated, raising the question of what they are thinking when they leave them there.
Several poskim recommend putting up signs in batei midrash to tell people they will relinquish their rights to sefarim left for a long time (see Living the Halachic Process III, I-12). However, this will not work here, if the noncompliant contractors are not agreeable to management’s dictates. Therefore, unless we can assume the contractors do not care about the remaining materials, aveida mida’at will probably not make them available to be claimed.
Bemare Habazak - Rabbis Questions (659)
Rabbi Daniel Mann
659 - Ask the Rabbi: Electric Lights as Neirot Shabbat
660 - Ask the Rabbi: Giving Away Offensively Left Materials
661 - Ask the Rabbi: Collecting Money for a Specific Medical Cause
Load More
However, this is an insufficient precedent regarding your question. Shimon’s ownership can be overlooked only to the extent needed to move the objects, not to give away the offending objects. The contractors’ objectionability is also not as severe as the one in the gemara’s case. If management is forbidden to confiscate, it also distinguishes our case from that of Bava Metzia 31a, where it is aveida mida’at because the non-Jew’s threat will not be tempered by Halacha.
Therefore, without casting final judgment, one would be hard-pressed to allow people to claim the materials if the owners want to keep them.
Lessons
fast navigation

Hosha'ana Rabba FLYDUBAI & HOSHANA RABBA- ANI VAHU HOSHIA NA- I & HIM SAVE US
"Ani vaHu Hoshia Na", "I and Him, Save Us". We don't just pray to Him, but we also pray to and for ourselves that we should emulate and educate our children to have that instinctive altruism with which He created the world. President Trump seemed amused about Yaniv Hayon, our PLUMBER who confidently worked with G-d like Superman (he learned from a pilot on a TV show!) to save 174 lives on the Dubai hijacking, but we in Israel are totally accustomed already 78 years to our plumbers, teachers, garbage-men, rabbis, farmers & doctors being Hashem's shlichim! This is what Zionism is about.

Moreshet Shaul Hashem Is your Shadow – part I
Based on Siach Shaul, Pirkei Machshava V’Hadracha p. 420 – an address from 1941

P'ninat Mishpat A Non-Contractor in Changing Times – part I
(based on ruling 85128 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts)

Moreshet Shaul Our King on Rosh Hashana, Our Father on Yom Kippur.
Based on Aroch Siach, p. 221 (Rav Shaul Yisraeli)


















