Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) WHEN MUST HE BE WORKING FOR HIM? (cont.)

(a) (Rava): "Im Ba'alav Imo Lo Yeshalem" - he is exempt if the owner was working for him at both times, or even at one of them.
(b) Question: "Ba'alav Ein Imo Shalem Yeshalem" - he is liable if the owner was not working for him at even one of the times!
(c) Answer: If he was working for him only at the time of borrowing, he is exempt; if he was working only at the time of death, he is liable!
(d) Suggestion: Why not say the other way - if he was working for him only at the time of borrowing, he is liable; if he was working only at the time of death, he is exempt!
(e) Answer #1: Presumably, the time of borrowing is more important, since the animal comes to his jurisdiction.

1. Question: No - the time of breakage or death is more important, for that is what he pays for!
2. Answer: Had he not borrowed, he would not be liable for the death.
3. Question: Had it not died, he would not be liable for borrowing!
4. Answer: He is liable for feeding it from when he borrows it.

(f) Answer #2 (Rav Ashi): "When a man will borrow me'Im Re'ehu (he will be liable)" - not when he borrows his neighbor with it (at the time of borrowing).
(g) Question: If so, why do we need the verses "Be'alav Ein Imo" and "Im Be'alav Imo"?
(h) Answer: If not for them, we would not have expounded "Me'Im Re'ehu", we would have said it is just a way of speaking.

(a) Question (Rami bar Chama): If Reuven borrowed an animal for bestiality, is this considered borrowing (Rashi - to be liable for Ones; Rambam - to get the exemption of b'Ba'alim - liability for Ones comes for having used it, even if he is not a borrower)?

1. Does the Torah only obligate for normal borrowing?
2. Or - is he liable because he gets free benefit, and here he gets free benefit?

(b) Question (Rami bar Chama): If he borrowed something to appear rich, is he like a borrower?

1. If it depends on getting monetary benefit - he gets it (people will give him credit);
2. Or - must he get benefit from the object itself?

(c) Question (Rami bar Chama): If he borrowed an animal to use for less than the value of a Perutah, is he like a borrower?

1. If it depends on getting monetary benefit - he gets it;
2. Or - is less than a Perutah like getting no benefit?

(d) Question (Rami bar Chama): If you will say that borrowing to use for less than a Perutah is exempt from Ones - what if he borrowed two animals to use for a Perutah?

1. The borrower gets a Perutah of benefit;
2. Or - do we say, since each borrowed animal does less than a Perutah of work, he is exempt?

(e) Question (Rami bar Chama): Reuven borrowed from two partners, and one of them was working for him.

1. Is he exempt only if all the owners are working for him, and they are not?
2. Or - is he exempt for the half of the owner working for him?

(a) Question (Rami bar Chama): If Reuven borrowed a woman's animal and hired her husband, or if a woman borrowed an animal and her husband hired the owner, what is the law?

1. (A husband owns rights to the earnings of his wife's property) - is he therefore considered the owner?

(b) Question (Ravina): Reuven told Shimon 'go work in place of me with my cow' - what is the law?

1. It the exemption only when the owner himself works?
2. Or - do we say, a man's agent is as himself?

(c) (Rav Acha brei d'Rav Avya): R. Yochanan and Reish Lakish argue regarding the question of the husband; R. Yonason and R. Yoshiyah argue regarding the question of the agent.

1. (R. Yochanan): Reuven sold the rights to the produce of his field to Shimon - Shimon brings Bikurim and recites the Parshah (in which he thanks Hash-m for "The land that you gave to me") - since he owns the rights to the produce, it is as if he owns the property;
2. (Reish Lakish): Shimon brings Bikurim but does not recite the Parshah - owning the produce is not like owning the property.

i. (R. Yochanan considers a woman's property like her husband's, Reish Lakish does not).

3. (Beraisa - R. Yoshiyah): Reuven told Shimon 'Annul any vows my wife will take until I return from my trip' (and he did so). One might have thought, they are annulled - "Ishah Yekimenu v'Ishah Yeferenu" (only her husband can annul them).
4. R. Yonason says, a man's agent is as himself in all respects.

i. (R. Yonason says that a man's agent is as himself regarding borrowing b'Ba'alim, R. Yoshiyah argues.)

(d) Question (Rav Ilish): Reuven told his slave 'go work in place of me with my cow' - what is the law?

1. This may be asked according to R. Yonason (who says that a man's agent is as himself) and according to R. Yoshiyah.

i. Perhaps R. Yonason only says that a man's agent is as himself when the agent himself is commanded about the matter - but a slave cannot be a lender or borrower (whatever he gets belongs to his master)!
ii. Perhaps R. Yoshiyah agrees that a man's slave is as himself, because the slave's hand (power of acquisition) is like his master's hand!

(e) Answer (Rava): Presumably, a man's slave is as himself.
(f) Question (Rami bar Chama): Is a man like a borrower of his wife's property, or a renter?

1. Objection (Rava): The question is pointless!

i. Whether he is a borrower or renter, he is exempt, for this is b'Ba'alim (she works for him)!

2. Answer #1: Rami bar Chama asked in a case where he rented a cow from her and later married her.

i. If a husband is a borrower - borrowing b'Ba'alim uproots the rental;
ii. If a husband is a renter - he continues to be a renter (and since it was not initially b'Ba'alim, he is liable).

3. Objection: Just as we say, if he is a borrower, borrowing b'Ba'alim uproots the rental - we should also say, if he is a renter, renting b'Ba'alim uproots the rental not b'Ba'alim!
4. Answer #2: Rami bar Chama asked in a case where she rented a cow from Shimon and later married Levi.
5. He does not ask according to Chachamim (of R. Yosi, 35B).

i. (Simchah rented Shimon's cow, and lent it to Levi; it died normally.) Chachamim say that Simchah swears that it died normally, and Levi pays Simchah. Even if a husband is a borrower, since he would pay his wife, this is b'Ba'alim, he is exempt.

6. Rami bar Chama asks according to R. Yosi, who says that Levi pays Shimon.

i. Since he is obligated to pay Shimon (who is not working for Levi or his wife), this is clearly not b'Ba'alim. Rami asks if Levi is a renter or a borrower.

(g) Answer (Rava): A husband is neither a renter or borrower, rather a buyer.

1. (R. Yosi b'Rebbi Chanina): In Usha, they enacted that a married woman who sold her Melug property and then died, her husband takes it back from the buyers (we consider him to be a previous buyer, from the time he married her).

(h) Question (Rami bar Chama): (A woman inherited property, her husband gets dominion over it; they did not know that it included Hekdesh.) Who transgressed Me'ilah?

1. Objection (Rava): The husband did not - he only wants to acquire permitted property!

i. She did not - she did not want him to acquire her (Rashi - forbidden) property!
ii. The current Beis Din (of the greatest Chachamim in Yisrael, to whom we attribute all Rabbinical enactments) did not - they only made a husband a buyer of her permitted property!

(i) Answer (Rava): The husband will transgress when he spends the Hekdesh (as anyone who unintentionally spends Hekdesh money).

(a) Question: If an animal became weaker on account of working, what is the law?

1. Question (Rav Chiliya brei d'Rav Avya): This implies that if it died on account of working he would be liable?! He borrowed it to work!

(b) Answer (Rava): Even if it died on account of working he is exempt - he borrowed it to work!
(c) Reuven borrowed a lamp from Shimon; it broke.

1. Rava: Bring witnesses that you did not use it abnormally, and you are exempt.
2. Question: If he cannot find witnesses, how much does he pay?
3. Answer: We learn from the following case.

i. Reuven borrowed a lamp from Shimon; it broke through negligence. Rav obligated him to pay for a proper lamp.
ii. Rav Kahana and Rav Asi: Is that really the law?
iii. Rav was silent.

4. The Halachah follows Rav Kahana and Rav Asi - Reuven returns the pieces, and pays the decreased value.