For question e), aren't both answers; Version 1 (f)g)) and Version 2 (h)i)) basically stating the same thing?
And if they aren't what is the main difference?
David Gafni, Toronto, Canada
The difference between them is as follows:
Version #1 (Rashi) explains, our case of the Talis is different than when a dead calf is found next to a gored cow, for there, either the goring caused the calf's death or not, it cannot be 'half-liable', if Beis Din would know the facts, is impossible to say that they would obligate half the normal payment for damage, this Pesak surely causes 1 side to lose what (Hash'm knows) should be the true law - but regarding the Talis, perhaps each really owns half, our Pesak gives each what he truly owns.
Version #2 (Tosfos) explains, our case is different than the dead calf, for there, the doubt is not due to false claims, even if each tells the truth (that he did not see the goring), Beis Din would have a doubt; Here, the doubt is because (at least 1 of them) is making a false claim - had they kept silent, we would have assumed that that each owns half (since both are Muchzak)!
P. Feldman