Q: I found an object that had a name and phone number on it. I called the owner, and he said that I should bring it to him, because that would be a complete fulfillment of the mitzvah of hashavas aveidah. Am I actually required to bring it to him, or can I ask him to collect it from me?
A: Both a gazlan (thief) and a shomer (guardian) are obligated to return an object to its owner. Some poskim differentiate between the two obligations, however. A gazlan, about whom the Torah states, “veheishiv, he shall return the object,” is obligated to bring the stolen item to the owner. A shomer, on the other hand, whom the Torah does not command to return the object entrusted to him, is merely required to relinquish the object to its owner upon request, so he may tell the owner to come and retrieve it at his convenience (see Ketzos 198:5, 340:4, among other places, but cf. Nesivos 86:1 and 340:3).
The Acharonim discuss whether a person who is obligated to perform hashavas aveidah is comparable in this regard to a gazlan or a shomer. Some say that since the Torah states hasheiv teshiveim (similar to the verb veheishiv stated regarding a gazlan), the mitzvah is to bring the object to the owner (Imrei HaTzvi, Bava Kamma 57a, 8:3). Other Acharonim write, however, that the finder of an aveidah generally has more exemptions on how he can return the object he found than a typical shomer (Choshen Mishpat 267:1 with Sma 1), and it is therefore enough for him to simply inform the owner that the object is available for him to retrieve at his convenience.
The act of informing the owner where the lost object is — which he had not known until that point — is a fulfillment of the mitzvah of hashavas aveidah, since the object is no longer lost. Furthermore, even according to the opinions that a shomer aveidah is a shomer sachar and is liable for theft (Choshen Mishpat 267:16), if a reasonable amount of time passes and the owner does not retrieve the object, the finder is no longer responsible for safeguarding it beyond the level of a shomer chinam, which means that he would be liable only for negligence in guarding it (see Shaarei Ziv, Nezikin 13; Dibros Moshe, Bava Metzia 31:53; Pis’chei Choshen, Aveidah 7:2; Chazon Ish, Choshen Mishpat 5:16, among others).
In truth, even the poskim who compare the finder to a gazlan due to the obligation of hasheiv teshiveim, acknowledge that the matter is the subject of a dispute. The Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 367:1) states that someone who stole something and wants to return it, is not obligated to bring it to the owner; he is allowed to inform him that he has it and may hold onto it until he comes to retrieve it. Only someone who swore falsely that he did not steal is obligated to seek out the owner of the stolen property and return it. But someone who stole and did not swear falsely, only needs to notify the owner (see Rema ibid., Shach 3 and Ketzos 1) and may hold onto the item until the owner retrieves it.
The reason a gazlan is not obligated to bring the stolen object to the owner is a matter of dispute. Some write that the chachamim made a decree (takanas hashavim) allowing him to wait until the owner comes to him out of fear that if he were required to track down the owner, he might decide not to return it altogether (Sma ibid. 1&4). Because that takanah does not apply to a case of hashavas aveidah (Nesivos 232:10), it is possible that the finder of a lost object is required to bring it to its owner.
Others write, however, that even without a takanah, a gazlan is not obligated to bring the stolen object to the owner, even latzeis yedei Shamayim (to avoid judgment in Heaven; Shach ibid. 1; cf. Nesivos 76:10). According to this approach, the finder of a lost object is obviously not required to bring it to the owner even when hashavas aveidah is compared to a gazlan.
Returning to your question, based on the above, contemporary Acharonim rule that you are not obligated to bring the object you found back to its owner (see Dinei Mishpat 1, pp. 408-409), but it would be a mitzvah of gemilus chassadim to do so.
