3

In the beginning perakim of Bava Metzia, there are several mishnayos (see: 1:8, 2:8, 3:4, 3:5) that present cases when there is uncertainty as to who the owner of an item may be, and state:

יְהֵא מֻנָּח עַד שֶׁיָּבֹא אֵלִיָּהוּ
it should remain [ie set aside] until Eliyahu comes

Question

I understand how Eliyahu could explain Torah stalemates (ie if תיקו is an acronym etc) as Eliyahu can reveal and resolve complex halachik questions.

But I assume Eliyahu wouldn't have a crystal ball etc- so how would Eliyahu be able to determine the rightful owner of an object or a monetary case between 2 people?

  • 1
    See Eduyot 8:7 for the dispute about what Eliyahu will do when he comes – b a Jun 16 at 14:43
  • 4
    I would that the opposite of your assumption is true - halachic principles are determined by majority vote of the Sanhedrin in which a prophet has no special standing (lo bashamayim hi); questions of historical reality, however (such as who lost an object), should be resolvable by prophecy, upon its return. – Loewian Jun 16 at 14:52
  • @Loewian Question assumes the Eliyahu doesn't have a "crystal ball". Not sure why he makes that assumption, being a navi and all... – AKA Jun 16 at 21:19
  • 1
    Further, as per Samuel I 9, it seems reuniting lost objects with their owners was very much under the purview of the prophets. – Loewian Jun 17 at 1:29
  • @Loewian right but how so? Nevuah or some other method etc? – alicht Jun 17 at 1:36

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .