Texts
Explore
Community
Donate
Log in
Sign up
Site Language
עברית
English
Borrowers
Property Law
Sources
A
When any party borrows [an animal] from another and it dies or is injured, its owner not being with it, restitution must be made.
Exodus 22:13
And furthermore,
even the second part of Rav Hamnuna’s ruling, that the exemption applies only when the owner was working for the borrower from the time of the borrowing of the animal until the time of the mishap, can be refuted, as
it is taught
in a
baraita
:
From the implication of that which is stated: “If its owner is with him, he does not pay”
(Exodus 22:14),
do I not
already
know
what is stated in the next verse,
that “if its owner is not with him, he shall pay”
(Exodus 22:13)?
Rather…
Bava Metzia 95b:13
MISHNA:
In the case of
one who borrowed a cow and borrowed
the services of
its owner with it, or
he borrowed a cow and
hired its owner with it,
or he
borrowed
the services of
the owner or hired him and afterward borrowed the cow;
in all such cases, if the cow
died,
the borrower is
exempt
from liability. Although a borrower is generally liable to pay if a cow he borrowed dies, here he is exempt,
as it is stated: “If its owner is with him, he does not pay”
(Exodus 22:14)…
Bava Metzia 94a:16-94b:11
When a husband borrows property from his wife or when partners borrow property from each other, it is considered as if the owner is working with the borrower. If one partner says to the other, "Lend me property today, and I will lend you tomorrow," it is not considered as if the owner is working with the borrower.
Mishneh Torah, Borrowing and Deposit 2:7
MISHNA:
In the case of
one who rents a cow from another, and
this renter then
lends it to another
person,
and
the cow
dies in its
typical
manner,
i.e., of natural causes, in the possession of the borrower,
the renter takes an oath
to the owner of the cow
that
the cow
died in its
typical
manner, and the borrower pays the renter
for the cow that he borrowed. A renter is exempt in a case of damage due to circumstances beyond his control, including death…
Bava Metzia 35b:5
§ The mishna teaches:
But if
the husband
said to
the agent: When you transmit the bill of divorce to my wife,
take for me such and such an item from her,
then the agent may not appoint a second agent, as it is not the desire of the husband that his deposit be in the possession of another.
Reish Lakish says: Here, Rabbi
Yehuda HaNasi
taught
that
a borrower is not allowed to lend
the item that he borrowed to someone else,
and a renter is not allowed to rent out
the item that he rented to someone else. In those cases, the same reasoning applies, i…
Gittin 29a:17
אם בעליו עמו, during the time the animal performs the work for which it has been loaned out. לא ישלם, the borrower. The reason is that under most circumstances, the animal has been loaned after both parties had agreed what kind of work it would be used for. Its status therefore is similar to that of a gift on the understanding that it would be returned. When one makes this kind of gift one does not draw up a list of conditions pertaining to the precise use the gift may be made of. If such a list of conditions had indeed been drawn up the nature of the entire transaction would have been…
Sforno on Exodus 22:14:1-2
§
Rami bar Ḥama raises a dilemma:
If one
borrowed
an animal in order
to engage in bestiality with it,
a severe transgression (see Leviticus 18:23),
what is
the
halakha
; is the borrower liable for mishaps? The crux of the dilemma is: In order for him to be liable,
do we require
that the borrowing be for a purpose
similar to that
for
which people
typically
borrow
animals,
and
since
people do not
typically
borrow
animals
for this
purpose, the borrower is exempt?
Or perhaps…
Bava Metzia 96a:9-13
A person who borrows an object without the consent of its owner is considered to be a robber.
If a utensil was in the hands of a person's son or servant and another person took it from him and used it, he is considered to have borrowed the object without the consent of its owner. The article is considered to have entered his domain, and he is responsible for it in the event of its destruction by forces beyond his control until he returns it to the owner.
Therefore, if he returns it to the minor or to the servant who was holding it beforehand, and then it is lost or stolen…
Mishneh Torah, Robbery and Lost Property 3:15
The Sages taught:
Even though one who borrows an ox from another is generally responsible for damage that it causes,
if he borrowed it on the presumption
that it was
innocuous
and it gored and caused damage,
and it was
then
found
to be
forewarned, the owner pays half
the cost of
the damage and the borrower pays half
the cost of
the damage.
If the ox
was rendered forewarned in the house of the borrower,
i.e., it gored three times while in his possession, and he was warned in court…
Bava Kamma 40a:20-23
§
The Sages taught
in a
baraita
: In the case of
one who borrows a Torah scroll from another, that
person
may not lend it to another,
i.e., a third person. He
may open it and read it, provided that he does not study
passages
in it for the first time,
lest the scroll be exposed for a lengthy period of time and sustain damage.
And another
person
shall not read
the scroll
with him,
lest the scroll tear.
And likewise,
in the case of
one who deposits a Torah scroll with another,
the bailee
rolls it every twelve months…
Bava Metzia 29b:10-13
§
A dilemma was raised before
the Sages: If the
flesh
of a borrowed animal
was weakened due to
the
labor
it performed for the borrower,
what
is the
halakha
? Is the borrower liable to compensate the owner of the animal?
One of the Sages, and Rav Ḥilkiya, son of Rav Avya, is his name, said to
the Sage who raised the dilemma:
By inference
from your question, it seems
that when
a borrowed animal
died due to
ordinary
labor
that it performed, the borrower
is liable…
Bava Metzia 96b:15-18
The Gemara asks:
But
according to that explanation, concerning
this
halakha
that Rava says: Misappropriation does not require loss, shall we say
that the opinion
that Rava stated is in accordance with
the opinion of
Beit Shammai? Rather, with what are we dealing here?
It is with a case
where
the bailee
moved
the barrel
to
stand
upon it
and
bring fledglings
from a nest in a tree.
And they disagree with regard to one who borrows
an item
without the knowledge
of the owner…
Bava Metzia 43b:3-4
When a person asks a colleague: "Lend me this stone tub of water," and it was destroyed, he may not rebuild it. If the borrower asks the owner: "Lend me a stone tub," without any description, and it is destroyed, he may rebuild it.
If he asked him: "Lend me the place of a stone tub," if a
kinyan
was established affirming this agreement, the borrower may build on the property of the lender until he constructs a stone tub that he may use to water his animal or irrigate his land, as he stipulated when speaking to the lender…
Mishneh Torah, Borrowing and Deposit 1:9-10
The Sages
say
in response: There is no concern in this case, as
people do not loan a pouch, a purse, or
a signet
ring
to another person. One does not loan his
pouch and
his
purse
to others
due to
the fact
that it portends
the loss of his good fortune.
And
one does not loan his signet
ring
to others
due to
the fact
that
it could be used to
forge
documents.
Bava Metzia 27b:11
Related
ראו גם
Laws of Borrowers
Sheets
דפי מקורות
Related Sheets
We use cookies to give you the best experience possible on our site. Click OK to continue using Sefaria.
Learn More
.
OK
אנחנו משתמשים ב"עוגיות" כדי לתת למשתמשים את חוויית השימוש הטובה ביותר.
קראו עוד בנושא
לחצו כאן לאישור
