BAVA METZIA 36 (25 Adar I) - Dedicated l'Iluy Nishmas Leah Rosenbaum, who passed away on 25 Adar I 5779, in honor of her Yahrzeit. Sponsored by her son, Ze'ev Rosenbaum of Yerushalayim.
1)
(a)The Socher and Sho'el referred to in our Mishnah are both obligated to swear. If they swear falsely, they will have to bring either a Chatas or an Asham. Why is the Sho'el obligated to swear, seeing as he is Chayav to pay anyway?
(b)When do they bring ...
1. ... a Chatas?
2. ... an Asham?
(c)What do each of these Korbanos comprise?
(d)If the animal died a natural death and they both swore that an Ones occurred, why will they both then need to bring a Chatas?
1)
(a)The Socher and Sho'el referred in our Mishnah are both obligated to swear. If they swear falsely, they will have to bring either a Chatas or an Asham. Despite the fact that he is Chayav to pay anyway, the Sho'el is obligated to swear that the article is not in his domain (like Rav Huna).
(b)They bring ...
1. ... a Chatas when they do not gain anything by swearing falsely.
2. ... an Asham (Gezeilos) when they do.
(c)A Chatas comprises a Kisbah (a female lamb) or Se'irah (a female kid-goat), and an Asham, a ram worth two Shekalim.
(d)If the animal died a natural death and they both swore that an Ones occurred, they will both then need to bring a Chatas because the Socher is Patur either way, and the Sho'el is Chayav.
2)
(a)What will they both bring if the animal was stolen and they both swore that it died naturally from work?
(b)Which Korban will each of them bring if they both swore that the animal ...
1. ... died from work, when in fact, it died naturally?
2. ... died naturally, when in fact it was stolen?
(c)Rebbi Yirmiyah, who lists all these cases, is coming to preclude the opinion of Rebbi Ami. What does Rebbi Ami learn from the Pasuk in Vayikra "O Nefesh ki Sishava le'Vatei bi'Sefasayim"?
2)
(a)If the animal was stolen and they both swore that it died naturally from work they will both bring an Asham (because they both exempted themselves from having to pay).
(b)If they both swore that ...
1. ... the animal died from work, when really it died naturally the Sho'el (who exempts himself from having to pay) will bring an Asham, and the Socher (who is Patur either way), a Chatas.
2. ... the animal died naturally, when in fact it was stolen the Sho'el (who is Chayav to pay either way), brings a Chatas, and the Socher (who exempted himself from paying), an Asham.
(c)Rebbi Yirmiyah, who lists all these cases, is coming to preclude the opinion of Rebbi Ami who learns from the Pasuk "O Nefesh ki Sishava le'Vatei bi'Sefasayim" that the obligation to bring a Chatas for a Shevu'as Bituy (a Shevu'ah from which one gains nothing) is confined to where the sinner swears of his own volition, but not where he swears under the auspices of Beis-Din.
3)
(a)Rav holds 'Shomer she'Masar le'Shomer Patur'. Abaye explains that this even pertains to a Shomer Sachar who handed the deposit to a Shomer Chinam (thereby effectively diminishing the Shemirah). Why is that?
(b)What exactly is he Patur from?
(c)Rebbi Yochanan holds 'Shomer she'Masar le'Shomer Chayav'. What does Abaye comment on that?
(d)Why is that?
(e)To what extent is the Shomer then Chayav, according to Rebbi Yochanan (see Tosfos DH 'Ein')?
3)
(a)Rav holds 'Shomer she'Masar le'Shomer Patur'. Abaye explains that this even pertains to a Shomer Sachar who handed the deposit to a Shomer Chinam (thereby effectively diminishing the Shemirah) because when all's said and done, he handed it to a responsible person.
(b)He is Patur from whatever he would have been Patur from had he continued to look after the article himself.
(c)Rebbi Yochanan holds 'Shomer she'Masar le'Shomer Chayav'. Abaye comments on that that he is referring even to a Shomer Chinam who handed it to a Shomer Sachar (thereby enhancing the Shemirah) ...
(d)... because the owner can argue that he did not want anybody else to handle his Pikadon.
(e)The Shomer is then Chayav even for Onsin (see Tosfos DH 'Ein').
4)
(a)In the story of the gardeners and their hoes, what did the gardener do with his colleagues hoes when he went to participate in a local wedding?
(b)When the hoes were stolen from the old woman, and Rav ruled that the appointed Shomer was Patur, the Talmid (who cited Rav above) thought that it was because Rav holds 'Shomer she'Masar le'Shomer, Patur'. How did Rav Chisda correct him? What made that case different?
(c)In that case, Rebbi Ami explained to Rebbi Aba bar Mamal, our Mishnah, which gives validity to a Socher who lends the Pikadon to a Sho'el, must be speaking when the owner authorized him to do so. That being so, why does the Sho'el pay the Socher, and not the owner?
4)
(a)In the story of the gardeners and their hoes, when the gardener went to participate in a local wedding he handed his colleagues hoes to the same old woman to whom they normally tended to hand them.
(b)When the hoes were stolen from her, and Rav ruled that the appointed Shomer was Patur, one of the Talmidim (who cited Rav above) thought that it was because Rav holds 'Shomer she'Masar le'Shomer, Patur'. Rav Chisda corrected him however by attributing Rav's lenient ruling to the fact that they regularly deposited their hoes with that old woman (dispensing with the argument that the owner does not want his Pikadon to be in anybody else's hands).
(c)In that case, Rebbi Ami explained to Rebbi Aba bar Mamal, our Mishnah, which gives validity to a Socher who lends the Pikadon to a Sho'el, must be speaking when the owner authorized him to do so. Nevertheless, the Sho'el pays the Socher and not the owner because the Tana is speaking where the owner gave the Socher permission to give it to him (and not when he instructed him to do so).
5)
(a)What does the Beraisa say about a Shomer who accepts money as a deposit and slings it over his shoulders, or places it in the charge of his young children without securing the door properly?
(b)What can we infer from the fact that the Tana refers to young children?
(c)How does Rami bar Chami query this from the current ruling of 'Shomer she'Moser le'Shomer'?
(d)How does Rava answer this Kashya? Why is this case different?
5)
(a)The Beraisa rules that if a Shomer who accepts money as a deposit and slings it over his shoulders, or places it in the charge of his young children without securing the door properly he is liable.
(b)From the fact that the Tana refers to young children we can infer that if he gave the money to his grown-up children, he would be Patur.
(c)According to the current ruling 'Shomer she'Moser le'Shomer Chayav', asks Rami bar Chami, why is the Shomer Patur if he hands the article to his grown-up children? Why do we not say here as well that the owner does not want his money to be in somebody else's hands?
(d)Rava answers by citing the principle that 'when someone deposits something with a Shomer, he does so on the understanding that his wife and grown-up children will share the responsibility'.
36b----------------------------------------36b
6)
(a)How do the Nehardai prove that when someone deposits something with a Shomer, he does so on the understanding that his wife and grown-up children will share the responsibility - from the Lashon of the Tana 'O she'Masran li'Veno u'le'Vito ha'Ketanim'? What does this Lashon imply?
(b)What should the Tana otherwise have said?
6)
(a)The Nehardai prove the principle that when someone deposits something with a Shomer, he does so on the understanding that his wife and grown-up children will share the responsibility from the Lashon of the Tana 'O she'Masran li'Veno u'le'Vito ha'Ketanim' implying that when it comes to depositing a Pikadon with strangers, the Tana draws no distinction between small children and grown-ups, and the Shomer is Chayav either way. Consequently, the reason that he is Patur for handing it to his grown-up children must be on account of the above principle.
(b)Otherwise the Tana ought to have said 'O she'Masran li'Ketanim'.
7)
(a)Rava concludes 'Shomer she'Masar le'Shomer Chayav'. What reason does he give for this ruling?
(b)What is the difference between Rava's reason and that of Abaye ('Ein Retzoni she'Yehei Pikdoni be'Yad Acher') - see Tosfos DH ?
7)
(a)Rava concludes 'Shomer she'Masar le'Shomer Chayav' because the owner can refuse to accept the Shevu'ah of the second Shomer (whom [seeing as he did not choose in the first place], he is under no obligation to trust).
(b)The difference between Rava's reason and that of Abaye ('Ein Retzoni she'Yehei Pikdoni be'Yad Acher') is a. where the first Shomer is able to swear, and b. where there are witnesses to back up the second Shomer's claim (in which case the first Shomer will be Patur).
8)
(a)According to Abaye quoting Rabah, if, due to the negligence of the Shomer, the animal walked out of the field into a public meadow and died, the Shomer is Chayav. Does this mean that Abaye holds 'Techilaso bi'Peshi'ah ve'Sofo be'Ones, Chayav'?
(b)Then what is Abaye's reason?
(c)What does Abaye (and subsequently Rava) say about a Dayan who rules otherwise?
(d)And why does Rava quoting Rabah rule that he is Patur (even according to those who hold 'Techilaso bi'Peshi'ah ve'Sofo be'Ones Chayav'?
8)
(a)According to Abaye quoting Rabah, if, due to the negligence of the Shomer, the animal walked out of the field into a public meadow and died, the Shomer is Chayav even according to those who hold 'Techilaso bi'Peshi'ah ve'Sofo be'Ones Patur'.
(b)Abaye's ruling is based on the owner's claim that it is the air of the meadow that killed it.
(c)Abaye (and subsequently Rava according to his view) says that a Dayan who rules otherwise is not a Dayan.
(d)Rava quoting Rabah rules that he is Patur (even according to those who hold 'Techilaso bi'Peshi'ah ve'Sofo be'Ones Chayav' because the Angel of Death would have caught the animal just the same had it remained where it was ('Mal'ach ha'Ma'ves, Mah li Hacha u'Mah li Hasam').
9)
(a)In which case does ...
1. ... Abaye concede that the Shomer is Patur in spite of his initial negligence?
2. ... Rava concede that he is Chayav because of his negligence?
(b)On the previous Amud, Rebbi Aba bar Mamal queried the ruling 'Shomer she'Masar le'Shamar Chayav', from our Mishnah, which discusses a Socher who lent a Pikadon to a Sho'el; and we answered by establishing the Mishnah, where he did so with the owner's consent. What Kashya did Abaye pose on Rava from there on the latter's current stance?
(c)What did Rava reply?
9)
(a)On the one hand ...
1. ... Abaye concedes that the Shomer is Patur in spite of his initial negligence once he has returned the animal to its original location. On the other ...
2. ... Rava concedes that he is Chayav because of his negligence in the event that the animal was stolen from the meadow and died in the domain of the Ganav (even though the Angel of Death would have caught him anyway), because he is liable for the animal having been stolen.
(b)On the previous Amud, Rebbi Aba bar Mamal queried the ruling that 'Shomer she'Masar le'Shamar Chayav', from our Mishnah, which discusses a Socher who lent a Pikadon to a Sho'el, on the ruling that 'Shomer she'Masar le'Shamar Chayav', and we answered by establishing the Mishnah when he did so with the owner's consent. Why, Abaye asked Rava (based on the fact that the Tana is talking about an animal that died naturally), why we cannot simply answer 'Mal'ach ha'Ma'ves, Mah li Hacha u'Mah li Hasam'?
(c)To which Rava replied that the very Kashya only applies according to Abaye, who cites Rabah's reason as 'Ein Retzoni she'Yehei Pikdoni be'Yad Acher'. Whereas according to his presentation of Rabah (that Shomer she'Masar le'Shomer is Chayav, because 'Ant Meheiman Li bi'Shevu'ah ... '), the Kashya does not even get off the ground, since in our Mishnah, it is the first Shomer who is swearing.
10)
(a)The Mishnah in 'ha'Socher es ha'Po'alim' holds the Shomer liable if the animal that he took up to the cliff-top fell off and died. What can we infer from there regarding a case where the animal died there naturally?
(b)On whom does this pose a Kashya?
(c)How do we reconcile Abaye with the Mishnah?
(d)Why is he ...
1. ... then Chayav even if the animal fell off?
2. ... then Patur in the Reisha, where the animal climbed up on its own initiative and fell off? Why is he not Chayav there too, because he should have held on to it?
10)
(a)The Mishnah in 'ha'Socher es ha'Po'alim' holds the Shomer liable if the animal that he took up to the cliff-top fell off and died implying that if the animal died there naturally he would be Patur ...
(b)... a Kashya on Abaye, in whose opinion he ought to be Chayav, because the owner can claim that either the mountain-air or the climb killed it'.
(c)We reconcile Abaye with the Mishnah by establishing the case by a particularly good grazing area, which all the local shepherds would use (in spite of its awkward location).
(d)He is nevertheless ...
1. ... Chayav even if the animal fell off because he should have held on to it.
2. ... Patur in the Reisha, where the animal climbed up on its own initiative and fell off because the Tana speaks where the animal was so keen to get there, that it dragged him up too, and he was unable to hold it back.
