Mishnah.org Logo

Today's Mishnah Yomi

Bava Metzia 7:8 - 7:9

The Mishnah Yomi for Monday, October 21, 2024 is Bava Metzia 7:8 - 7:9

＜ Previous DayTodayNext Day ＞

Mishnah 1

Mishnayos Bava Metzia Perek 7 Mishnah 8

בבא מציעא פרק ז׳ משנה ח׳

8
The mishna adds: Watchmen of produce may eat the produce of the field or vineyard by local regulations, i.e., in accordance with the ordinances accepted by the residents of that place, but not by Torah law. There are four types of bailees, to whom different halakhot apply. They are as follows: An unpaid bailee, who receives no compensation for safeguarding the item; and the borrower of an item for his own use; a paid bailee, who is provided with a salary for watching over an item; and a renter, i.e., a bailee who pays a fee for the use of a vessel or animal. If the item was stolen, lost, or broken, or if the animal died in any manner, their halakhot are as follows: An unpaid bailee takes an oath over every outcome; whether the item was lost, stolen, or broken, or if the animal died, the unpaid bailee must take an oath that it happened as he described, and he is then exempt from payment. The borrower does not take an oath, but pays for every outcome, even in a circumstance beyond his control. And the halakhot of a paid bailee and a renter are the same: They take an oath over an injured animal, over a captured animal, and over a dead animal, attesting that the mishaps were caused by circumstances beyond their control, and they are exempt, but they must pay for loss or theft.
שׁוֹמְרֵי פֵרוֹת אוֹכְלִין מֵהִלְכוֹת מְדִינָה, אֲבָל לֹא מִן הַתּוֹרָה. אַרְבָּעָה שׁוֹמְרִין הֵן. שׁוֹמֵר חִנָּם, וְהַשּׁוֹאֵל, נוֹשֵׂא שָׂכָר, וְהַשּׂוֹכֵר. שׁוֹמֵר חִנָּם נִשְׁבָּע עַל הַכֹּל, וְהַשּׁוֹאֵל מְשַׁלֵּם אֶת הַכֹּל, וְנוֹשֵׂא שָׂכָר וְהַשּׂוֹכֵר נִשְׁבָּעִים עַל הַשְּׁבוּרָה וְעַל הַשְּׁבוּיָה וְעַל הַמֵּתָה, וּמְשַׁלְּמִין אֶת הָאֲבֵדָה וְאֶת הַגְּנֵבָה:
ח׳

שומרי פירות – those who guard vats and piles and detached produce, but those who guard gardens and orchards, we do not consume, neither from the laws of the province, nor from the Torah, for a bailee is not like someone doing anything.

מהלכות מדינה – that already was practiced as such.

נשבע על הכל – on all of the events that are written with the other bailees for liability, he takes an oath that such has happened to him and he is exempt.

משלם את הכל – theft, and loss and unavoidable accidents.

נושא שכר וכו' – and all of these are derived from Biblical verses in the portion of “V’Eleh Mishpatim”/”And these are the ordinances”. The first portion (Exodus 22:6) “When a man gives [money or goods] to another” is stated regarding the unpaid bailee. The second (Exodus 22:9): “When a man gives to another an ass, an ox, a sheep…” is stated [with regard] to a paid bailee, for he is liable for theft and loss, as it is written (concerning it) (Exodus 22:11): “But if [the animal] was stolen from him, he shall make restitution to its owner.” I don’t have anything other than “theft,” from where to I learn “loss?” The inference teaches (Exodus 22:11): “But if [the animal] was stolen…” in any case. And further, an inference from the weaker to the stronger (i.e., a fortiori), Just as theft is close to an unavoidable accident, one is liable, loss, which is close to negligence, is it not obvious? And the renter, since not all the benefit is his, the law is like the paid bailee. And the borrower is explained in the third section (Exodus 22:13): “When a man borrows [an animal] from another and it dies or is injured, its owner not being with it, he must make restitution.”

שומרי פירות. שומרי גיתות וערימות ופירות תלושים. אבל שומרי גנות ופרדסים, אין אוכלים לא מהלכות מדינה ולא מן התורה, דשומר לאו כעושה מעשה דמי:

מהלכות מדינה. שכבר נהגו כן:

נשבע על הכל. על כל המאורעות הכתובות בשאר שומרים לחיוב, נשבע שכך עלתה לו ופטור:

משלם את הכל. גניבה ואבידה ואונסים:

נושא שכר וכו׳ וכולהו נפקא לן מקראי פרשת ואלה המשפטים. פרשה ראשונה כי יתן איש אל רעהו וגו׳ נאמרה בשומר חנם, שכן פטר בו גנבה ואבדה. שניה, כי יתן איש אל רעהו חמור או שור או שה נאמרה בשומר שכר, שכן חייב בו גנבה ואבדה, דכתיב בה אם גנב יגנב מעמו ישלם לבעליו, אין לי אלא גניבה, אבידה מנין, תלמוד לומר אם גנב יגנב, מכל מקום. ועוד, קל וחומר, ומה גניבה שקרובה לאונס חייב, אבידה שקרובה לפשיעה לא כל שכן. ושוכר, כיון שאין כל הנאה שלו דינו כשומר שכר. והשואל, מפורש בפרשה שלישית וכי ישאל איש מעם רעהו ונשבר או מת בעליו אין עמו שלם ישלם:

Mishnah 2

Mishnayos Bava Metzia Perek 7 Mishnah 9

בבא מציעא פרק ז׳ משנה ט׳

9
One wolf that approaches a flock and attacks is not considered a circumstance beyond one’s control, as the shepherd can drive it away, but an attack by two wolves is considered a circumstance beyond one’s control. Rabbi Yehuda says: At a time of wolf attacks, when many wolves come out of hiding and pounce on animals at every corner, even an attack by one wolf is considered a circumstance beyond one’s control. An attack by two dogs is not considered a circumstance beyond one’s control. Yadua the Babylonian says in the name of Rabbi Meir: If the two dogs came and attacked from one direction it is not considered a circumstance beyond one’s control, but if they attacked from two directions, this is considered a circumstance beyond one’s control, as the shepherd cannot protect his flock from both of them at once. If bandits came, this is considered a circumstance beyond one’s control. Likewise, with regard to an attack by a lion, a bear, a leopard, a cheetah, and a snake, these are each considered a circumstance beyond one’s control. When is an attack by one of the above considered beyond his control, which means that a paid bailee is exempt? It is when the dangerous beasts or bandits came of their own accord to the usual grazing spot. But if the shepherd led his flock to a place of groups of beasts or bandits, this is not considered a circumstance beyond one’s control, as he is at fault.
זְאֵב אֶחָד, אֵינוֹ אֹנֶס, שְׁנֵי זְאֵבִים, אֹנֶס. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, בִּשְׁעַת מִשְׁלַחַת זְאֵבִים, אַף זְאֵב אֶחָד אֹנֶס. שְׁנֵי כְלָבִים, אֵינוֹ אֹנֶס. יַדּוּעַ הַבַּבְלִי אוֹמֵר מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי מֵאִיר, מֵרוּחַ אַחַת, אֵינוֹ אֹנֶס, מִשְּׁתֵּי רוּחוֹת, אֹנֶס. הַלִּסְטִים, הֲרֵי זֶה אֹנֶס. הָאֲרִי וְהַדֹּב וְהַנָּמֵר וְהַבַּרְדְּלָס וְהַנָּחָשׁ, הֲרֵי זֶה אֹנֶס. אֵימָתַי, בִּזְמַן שֶׁבָּאוּ מֵאֲלֵיהֶן, אֲבָל אִם הוֹלִיכָן לִמְקוֹם גְּדוּדֵי חַיָּה וְלִסְטִים, אֵינוֹ אֹנֶס:
ט׳

זאב אחד אינו אונס – and a paid bailee and a renter are liable for it, as it is written (Exodus 22:12): “…he need not replace what has been torn by beasts.” There is something torn by beasts that he does pay, and there is something torn by beasts that he does not pay.

כשעת משלחת זאבים – when an evil beast is sent away, it jumps upon another person. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehuda and is not known in the Babylonian Talmud.

הלסטים – one robber – this is an unavoidable accident.

זאב אחד אינו אונס. ונושא שכר ושוכר חייבין עליו. דכתיב הטרפה לא ישלם, יש טרפה שהוא משלם ויש טרפה שאינו משלם:

בשעת משלחת זאבים. בשחיה רעה משולחת קופצת היא על אדם אחד. ואין הלכה כרבי יהודה ולא כידוע הבבלי:

הלסטים. חד לסטים הרי זה אונס:

Mishnah Yomi FAQ

Still have a question? Contact Us