I was coming back from the sea shore and it occurred to me the basic approach of Rav Shach concerning Bava Metzia page 3. The main question is this. The Rambam brings both the first Mishna in Bava Metzia and the Mishna about the third hundred with no further explanation and leaves out the fact that the Gemara finds these two Mishnayot to be in contradiction one with the other and leaves out the answer of the Gemara. I think that the main point of Rav Shach is that the mishna about two are holding a garment is a case of certainty and that in any case of certainty the law would be to divide. So, what then is the difference between this and the third hundred? It is not that two are holding while the other is that one is holding for them. Rather the difference is that when two are holding it is certain which half belongs to whom but with the third hundred it is uncertain. There is a doubt and therefore the third hundred stays in its place. But then the question is from the boat in Bava Batra page 34 where we say who ever us stronger, gets it. There also there is a doubt to who it belongs. But there no one is holding it for them. This is different from the answer to the same question of Rav Nachum of the Mir who holds the answer to this problem in the Rambam is this. The Gemara is asking in Bava Metzia what is the difference between the two mishnayot because it holds like Rav Papa in Bava Batra who holds if we hold, we do let go even in the case of a doubt. Thus, the Gemara in Bava Metzia had no way of answering that the third party is holding the third hundred for them because he would have had to let it go anyway. It had to be because the division would not have been according to objective reality. But the law is if we hold, we do not let go. Thus, the Rambam had no reason to bring the answer of the Gemara in Bava Metzia.--------------------------------------------I was coming back from the sea shore and it occurred to me the basic approach of רב שך concerning בבא מציעא page ג'. The main question is this. The רמב’’ם brings both the first משנה in בבא מציעא and the משנה about the third hundred with no further explanation and leaves out the fact that the גמרא finds these two משניות to be in contradiction one with the other and leaves out the answer of the גמרא. I think that the main point of רב שך is that the משנה about two are holding a garment is a case of certainty and that in any case of certainty the law would be to divide. So, what then is the difference between this and the third hundred? It is not that two are holding while the other is that one is holding for them. Rather the difference is that when two are holding it is certain which half belongs to whom but with the third hundred it is uncertain. There is a doubt and therefore the third hundred stays in its place. But then the question is from the boat in בבא בתרא page ל''ד where we say who ever us stronger, gets it. There also there is a doubt to who it belongs. But there no one is holding it for them. This is different from the answer to the same question of רב נחום of the מיר who holds the answer to this problem in the רמב’’ם is this. The גמרא is asking in בבא מציעא what is the difference between the two משניות because it holds like רב פפא in בבא בתרא who holds if we hold, we do let go even in the case of a doubt אי תפסינן מפקינן. Thus, the גמרא in בבא מציעא had no way of answering that the third party is holding the third hundred for them because he would have had to let it go anyway. It had to be because the division would not have been according to objective reality. But the law is if we hold, we do not let go אי תפסינן לא מפקינן. Thus, the רמב’’ם had no reason to bring the answer of the גמרא in Bava Metzia.Background information. If two people ae holding a garment, they divide it. If one person holds a hundred for one person and two hundred for the other, the third hundred and forgotten whom is what, the law is the third hundred stays in its place. But to the Rambam, both cases are considered as if both people are holding the sum total the third case is that of a boat that two people hold is theirs alone. whoever is stronger gets it. The court offers no opinion about what it cannot determine.------------------