michelle

Nov 072016
 

What level of shmira is needed for various items?  How did people watch money?  How did that change over time, according to the amoraim?  Various cases are brought which relate to cases with different issues – tchilato b’pshia v’sofo b’ones, a shomer that gives to someone else to watch, one who wasn’t clear about his instructions to another shomer or to his worker (who accidentally took the item he was watching instead of his own).

Nov 062016
 

If one moves a barrel that one is supposed to watch and it broke, the mishna depends the halacha upon why it was moved (for the sake of the item or for the shomer’s use of the item) and at what point it broke (while in the shomer’s hand or after it was returned) and was it a case where the owner had specified where the shomer should keep it.  The gemara attempts to explain the logic behind the mishna and as it especially relates to something contradictory.  One approach is to say that the mishna is composed of two different opinions.  A different approach is to bring in an additional parameter not mentioned explicitly in the mishna – was it returned to its proper place or returned to a different location.  within the latter interpretation there are 3 opinions about why the shomer moved the item – to use part of it (shilchut yad), to steal the whole thing or to borrow it?  The difference between the first two opinions is based on a difference of opinion regarding the case of shlichut yad where one becomes responsible even for unanticipated damages – is it only if the item depreciates in value or even if there is no loss?   Derivations from the repetition of the verses where shlichut yad is mentioned are brought as it seems unnecessarily mentioned both by a shomer chinam and a shomer sachar.  4 different derivations are brought.

Study Guide Bava Metzia 41

Nov 042016
 

Further discussions revolving around the issue of someone who abandons their land.  Can a relative take charge of his property?  It depends on is the relative a minor, is the person who abandoned the property a minor?  For what reason did they leave?  And various other factors.

Nov 032016
 

If one is watching an item and it begins to rot, should he sell it or does he need to leave it as is and return in whatever condition it is?  Is there a difference if the item has totally rotted?  What if it is wine that turned to vinegar or honey or oil that totally spoiled?  Different opinions are brought and also different explanations.  Is there a connection between this issue and whether or not a one is allowed to go into a relative’s field who has been taken captive and work the field or not?

Nov 022016
 

Is Rabbi Yossi’s opinion that one can’t make money off someone else’s item, also what he holds in the first mishna regarding the shomer who pays for the item and acquires the double payment in the event the robber is found?  The next mishna raises cases regarding doublts about who money was stolen from or whose pikadon it was?  The gemara questions the cases up against each other and up against other mishnayot and other principles regarding money in doubt and tries to reconcile the differences.

Nov 012016
 

Some unique cases are brought where the owner rentout out an animal and subsequently borrowed it for part of the time and then rented out for part of the time and then borrowed it again for part of the time.  If the animal dies during the borrowing period, one can be obligated to pay 3 or 4 cows to the renter.  Others disagree with this.  Can a shomer give an item to someone else to watch?  Different reasons are given to explain why this would be a problem.  They thought that Rav held it was ok, but it was later explained that it was based on a misunderstanding from a psak of Rav’s.  If one was negligent and brought the animal to a marsh (where thieves could come or predators) but the animal died in a typical manner, Abaye and Rava debate what Raba held – whether he would be exempt or obligated.  They each explain in their own way how this case is different from a classic case of tchilato b’pshia vesofo b’ones (one who does a negligent act but in the end there is accidental damage.

Oct 312016
 

Rav Huna holds that the one who claims the item was lost of stolen, must swear that the item is no longer in his possession.  The gemara raises a contradiction from a braita and 4 answers are given (one is rejected).  A case is brought where one claimed jewels were lost and they took a palace of his instead (when he refused to pay).  When he then produced the “lost” item which had gone up in value, Rav Nachman said to give him his palace back and return the jewels to the owner.  Rava tried to agrue with this psak based on our mishna saying that he should have acquired rights to the appreciation by having paid for them.  But then he himself realizes why the cases are different.  In connection with this, the gemara raises the issue regarding a loan – if it gets repaid by foreclosing on land and when the borrower gets the money to pay, can he gets his land back?  Is there a time limit?  The gemara holds that one can get back his land and there is no time limit.  However the gemara explains in what cases this law applies and in which circumstances it would not apply.  The last issue on this topic is at what point of a foreclosure does the creditor get rights to proceeds of the land?  One who rents an animal and then lends it to someone else and it dies in a typical manner (for which a borrower is responsible and a renter is not) – there is a debate about to whom the borrower pays – to the renter (in the event that he swears that it died in a typical manner) or to the original owner.  The gemara questions exactly by what mechanism does he acquire rights to the animal?

Study Guide Bava Metzia 35

Oct 302016
 

A shomer who can be exempt from payment and decides to pay anyway, acquires rights to the double payment (or the 4 or 5 payment for an animal that the robber slaughtered and sold) in the event that the robber is caught down the road.  The gemara discusses how this mechanism works if it mean that the owner is giving him rights to something that is not yet in existence.  The gemara also discusses whether it is enough if he just says he will pay or if he actually needs to pay in order to exempt himself.  Various scenarios are brought to question whether or not in those scenarios the owner would give rights to the double payment to the shomer (for example is the shomer died and it was to his sons – maybe he only gave rights to the shomer himself).  All the questions raised are left unanswered.  A halacha is brought that one must swear before

Study Guide Bava Metzia 34

Oct 282016
 

If one loses money from his work by taking a lost item, how do we determine what compensation he receives from the owner?  According to the mishna, if he wants to get his full salary, he needs stipulate that in front of three men.  A story is brought about a different case where there was a debate about whether it needed to be done before 3 men like the case in our mishna or two is sufficient.  If one finds an animal in a cowshed, it is not considered a lost item but in a public thoroughfare, it is.  More details of this are discussed in the gemara.  If one’s parent tells you to do something against what the Torah prescribes, one cannot listen to one’s parent.  The differences between loading and unloading are discussed.  Within the context of that conversation, Rava claims that the mitzva of tzaar baalei chayim is prescribed by the Torah.  Various proofs and contradictory sources are brought.

Oct 272016
 

If you find an animal wandering, how do you determine if an animal is lost or if it is just wandering and the owner is aware that is has wandered?  Various drashot are brought regarding places in the Torah where a double language is used and what can be derived from there.