1) BREACHES OF CONTRACT
(a) (Mishnah): If Reuven rented a cow to plow on the
mountain, and he plowed in the valley, and the blade of
the plow broke, he is exempt;
1. If he rented it to plow in the valley, and he plowed
on the mountain and the blade broke, he is liable.
(b) If he rented it to thresh legumes, and he threshed grain,
he is exempt. If he rented it to thresh grain and he
threshed legumes, he is liable, for legumes are slippery.
(c) (Gemara) Question: If he did not deviate, which of the
workers pays?
(d) Answer #1 (Rav Papa): The one holding the plow handle
pays (he should have led it straight).
(e) Answer #2 (Rav Shisha brei d'Rav Idi): The one holding
the blade pays (he inserted it too deeply in the ground.
(f) The Halachah follows Rav Shisha;
1. If it is known that it was a rocky area, they both
pay (Rashi - either may have caused it to break;
Tosfos - both were negligent)
i don't understand the question. didn't we learn in the mishna that if there was no deviation there is no payment? "....the plow broke, he is exempt". so why if there are 2 people, one of them should pay?????
Tosfos and the Ritva both explain that the cow and the plough both belong to the Maskir. The Mishnah refers to the Chiyuv of the one who rented the cow, and therefore if he did not change what he agreed with the owner he is Patur. The Gemara asks, in the case that the one who rented the cow is Patur, which one of the two workers must pay. However, in the Mishnah where the one who rented the cow did not keep to the agreement, the workers are P'turim, since they can say that they did not agree to look after the plough under such circumstances.
Dov Freedman