In the name of the Lord,

In explaining why two holders of the law will divide and not all male dalim, some explain that since the division here is certainly due to a presumption of what is under the hand of a person, I do not understand because as far as it is to be discussed that the object belongs to the person who is seized, this should not be a reason to divide because the evidence in the seizure does not prove that they picked up the object at that moment and if we establish that the division is based on evidence then the evidence from the seizure itself will at most be a reason to exclude all male dalim but not a reason to divide it because there is evidence that they picked up the object together but if we say that the division is not evidence but because the court does not know who the object belongs to then they rule for the object to a new owner and while they are seized they give a reason why the new ownership that they rule here will go to them but those who are not holding there is no one here who shows a reason that he will be the owner and therefore all male dalim are male and according to this because the division is not based on evidence therefore they do not take into account who collected it first but if everything is based on evidence where is the evidence that everyone has half We actually have no evidence that they were lifted together.