BAVA METZIA 96 (Tisha b'Av) - Dedicated by Rabbi Dr. Eli Turkel of Ra'anana, Israel, in memory of his father, Reb Yisrael Shimon ben Shlomo ha'Levi Turkel, whose Yahrzeit is on 10 Av.


(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: Perhaps it is 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 (from his neighbor, he will be liable)", but not when he borrows Im Re'ehu (with his neighbor, 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 that it is normal for a verse to speak this way.


(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, but liability for Ones comes for having used it, even if he is not a borrower)?

1.Perhaps the Torah discusses only normal borrowing;

2.Or, a borrower is one who gets free benefit, and here also he gets free benefit!

(b)Question: 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, perhaps he must benefit from the object itself!

(c)Question: 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 benefit from) something of worth, this is fulfilled;

2.Or, perhaps less than a Perutah is like getting no benefit?

(d)Question: If you will say that borrowing to use for less than a Perutah is not like borrowing, if he borrowed two animals to use for a Perutah, what is the law?

1.The borrower gets a Perutah of benefit;

2.Or, since each borrowed animal does less than a Perutah of work, perhaps he is unlike a borrower!

(e)Question: If Reuven borrowed from two partners, and one of them was working for him, what is the law?

1.Perhaps the exemption is only if all the owners are working for him, and they are not;

2.Or, perhaps he is exempt for the half of the owner working for him!

(f)Question: If two partners borrowed from Shimon, and he was working for one of them, what is the law?

1.Perhaps the exemption is only if the owner is working for all the borrowers, and he is not;

2.Or, perhaps the partner for whom the owner is working is exempt for his half?


(a)Question: 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.Is Kinyan Peros (a husband's owns the earnings of his wife's property) like Kinyan ha'Guf (owning the property itself)?

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

1.Perhaps the exemption is only when the owner himself works;

2.Or, do we say that one's Shali'ach is like himself?

(c)(Rav Acha brei d'Rav Avya): R. Yochanan and Reish Lakish argue about the question about the husband. R. Yonason and R. Yoshiyah argue about the question about the Shali'ach.

1.(R. Yochanan): If Reuven sold the rights to the Peros 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.") Kinyan Peros is like Kinyan ha'Guf ;

2.(Reish Lakish): Shimon brings Bikurim but does not recite the Parshah. Kinyan Peros is not like Kinyan ha'Guf.

i.(R. Yochanan considers a husband to own his wife's property. Reish Lakish does not.)

3.(Beraisa - R. Yoshiyah) Suggestion: If Reuven told Shimon 'annul any vows that my wife will take until I return from my trip' (and he did so), perhaps they are annulled !

4.Rejection: "Ishah Yekimenu v'Ishah Yeferenu" (only her husband can annul them).

5.R. Yonason says, a man's Shali'ach is like himself in all respects.

i.(R. Yonason says that one's Shali'ach is like himself regarding borrowing b'Ba'alim. R. Yoshiyah argues.)

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

1.We can ask according to R. Yonason (who says that a man's Shali'ach is like himself) and according to R. Yoshiyah.

i.Perhaps R. Yonason says that one's Shali'ach is like himself only when the Shali'ach 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 one's slave is like himself, because the slave's Yad (power of acquisition) is like his master's Yad!

(e)Answer (Rava): Presumably, a man's slave is like 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 about one who rented a cow from a woman, 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: If he is a borrower, we say that borrowing b'Ba'alim uproots the rental. Likewise, if he is a renter, we should say that renting b'Ba'alim uproots rental not b'Ba'alim!

4.Answer #2: Rami bar Chama asked about a woman who rented a cow from Shimon and later married Levi.

5.He does not ask according to Chachamim (of R. Yosi, 35b).

i.(If Simchah rented Shimon's cow and lent it to Levi, and 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, so he is exempt.

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

i.Since he is liable 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): (When a woman marries, her husband eats the Peros of her property. If she said that it should be Nichsei Melug, when she is widowed or divorced, she takes back her property without compensation for any increase or decrease in value.) In Usha, they enacted that if a married woman sold her Nichsei Melug and then died, her husband takes it back from the buyers. (We consider it as if he bought her property beforehand, from the time he married her.)

(h)Question (Rami bar Chama): (If a married woman inherited property, her husband acquires (the rights to eat the Peros from) it. If they did not know that it included Hekdesh, who transgressed Me'ilah?

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

2.She did not. She did not want him to acquire her (Rashi - forbidden) property!

3.The Beis Din (Rashi - the greatest Chachamim in Yisrael at the time, to whom we attribute all Rabbinical enactments) did not. They made a husband like a buyer only of her permitted property!

(i)Answer (Rava): The husband will transgress Me'ilah when he spends the Hekdesh (like anyone who unknowingly spends Hekdesh money).


(a)Question: If an animal became weaker due to working, what is the law?

1.Question (Rav Chilkiya brei d'Rav Avya): This implies that if it died due to working, he would be liable. This is unreasonable. He borrowed it to work!

(b)Answer (Rava): Not only if an animal became weaker due to working, rather, even if it died, he is exempt, for he borrowed it to work!

(c)Reuven borrowed a lamp from Shimon, and it broke.

1.Rava: Bring witnesses that you did not use it abnormally, and you are exempt.

(d)Question: If he cannot find witnesses, how much does he pay?

(e)Answer: We learn from the following case.

1.Reuven borrowed a lamp from Shimon, and it broke (through negligence). Rav obligated him to pay for a proper lamp.

2.Rav Kahana and Rav Asi: Is that really the law?

3.Rav was silent.

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