ב דָּבָר שֶׁהוּא רָאוּי לְהַצִּיל<i data-commentator="Notes by Heinrich Guggenheimer" data-label="44"></i> וּשְׁכָחוֹ מַהוּ שֶׁיֵּעָשֶׂה שִׁכְחָה. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מִן הָדָא עִימֵּר אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹן וְאֶת הַשֵּׁנִי וְאֶת הַשְּׁלִישִׁי וְשָׁכַח אֶת הָרְבִיעִי. אִית תְּנָיֵי תַּנִּי אִם נָטַל אֶת הַחֲמִישִׁי הֲרֵי זוּ שִׁכְחָה. וְאִית תְּנָיֵי תַּנִּי אִם שָׁהָא לִיטּוֹל הַחֲמִישִׁי הֲרֵי זוּ שִׁכְחָה. אָמַר רִבִּי בּוּן בַּר חִיָיא מָאן דְּאָמַר נָטַל אֶת הַחֲמִישִׁי בִּשֶׁיֵּשׁ שָׁם שִׁישִׁי. מָאן דְּאָמַר אִם שָׁהָא לִיטּוֹל אֶת הַחֲמִישִׁי בִּשֶׁאֵין שָׁם שִׁישִׁי. אִם עַד שֶׁלֹּא נָטַל אֶת הַחֲמִישִׁי לֹא כְּבָר נִרְאֶה לוֹ הָרְבִיעִית לִידוֹן כְּשׁוּרָה. הָדָא אָמְרָה דָּבָר שֶׁהוּא רָאוּי לְהִצֹּיל וּשְׁכָחוֹ הֲרֵי הוּא שִׁכְחָה.
2 Can something that is apt to be saved but was forgotten become legally forgotten? Let us hear from the following: “When he removed the first, second, and third sheaves but forgot the fourth, some state: If he took away the fifth one, it (the fourth) becomes legally forgotten, but some state: If he waited long enough that he could have taken away the fifth one, it becomes legally forgotten.” Rebbi Avin bar Ḥiyya said, he who says, “if he removed the fifth one,” (speaks of the case) where there is a sixth one, but he who says, “if he waited long enough that he could have removed the fifth one,” (speaks of the case) where there is no sixth one. Before he took away the fifth one, would not the fourth one be apt to be considered starting a row? That means that something that is apt to be saved but was forgotten can become legally forgotten.