Se uno mandava il suo [piccolo] figlio da un negoziante con un pondion [due issarin] in mano [per portare petrolio per una issar e restituire una issar], e misurava una issar di petrolio per lui e gli dava un issar, e lui (il bambino) ha rotto il pallone [e versato l'olio] e ha perso il issar, il commerciante è responsabile [per il petrolio, il pallone e la issar. Perché il padre mandò suo figlio piccolo dal negoziante solo per dirgli che aveva bisogno di olio, non per farlo mandare l'olio con suo figlio. Il Gemara chiede perché il negoziante dovrebbe essere responsabile per il pallone quando si tratta di "perdita intenzionale", il padre stesso lo ha inviato con suo figlio! E risponde che (l'istanza è quella in cui) il negoziante lo prese per misurare il petrolio per gli altri, diventando un ladro nei confronti del pallone, in modo che sia considerato nel suo dominio fino a quando non lo restituisce al proprietario. E anche se lo ha restituito al bambino, questo non lo ha esentato.] R. Yehudah lo esenta; poiché fu a tal fine che lo mandò [cioè, che il negoziante lo mandò con suo figlio.] E i saggi concessero a R. Yehudah che se il pallone fosse nelle mani del bambino e il negoziante lo misurasse, non lo è responsabile [per il pallone. L'halachah non è conforme a R. Yehudah.]
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Batra
השולח בנו – minor [child] with the storekeeper and in his hand was a Duponium/a Roman coin equal to two Asses which are two Issarim to bring to him an Issar of oil. And he will give him another Issar. And this is what he did. But the young child broke the flask and the oil spilled and he lost the Issar that the storekeeper gave him. The storekeeper is liable for oil, and for the flask and for the Issar, for the father did not send his minor-age child to the storekeeper other than to inform him that he needs oil, not that he should send the oil through his (i.e., the child’s) hand. And in the Gemara (Tractate Bava Batra 87b-88a), it raises the question: why is the storekeeper liable for the flask? It is a loss with consent. For he himself (i.e., the father) sent it in the hand of his son, and [the Gemara] answers for example that the storekeeper took it to measure oil for others. Therefore, he became a thief concerning it. And it exists in his domain until he returns it to the mater. And even though he returned it to the young child, he is not exempt from it.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Batra
Introduction
Mishnah nine deals with a father who sends his small child to buy oil from a shopkeeper and on the way home the son drops the flask of oil.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Batra
רבי יהודה פוטר שעל מנת כן שלחו – for just as the storekeeper sent it in the hand of his son
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Batra
If a man sent his child to a shopkeeper with a pondion (a in his hand and he measured him out an issar’s (a coin worth half a worth of oil and gave him an issar in change and the child broke the flask and lost the issar, the shopkeeper is liable. Rabbi Judah declares him exempt, since the father sent the child for this purpose. And the Sages agree with Rabbi Judah that if the flask was in the child’s hand, and the shopkeeper measured the oil into it, the shopkeeper is exempt. In the scenario in our mishnah a father sends his child to a store to buy him some oil. The shopkeeper hands him a flask containing the requested oil and the change from the sale. According to the Sages, if the child should lose the oil or the coin on his return home, the shopkeeper is liable to pay back the father. Since a child is not responsible for his actions, the shopkeeper should have found a safer way of returning the oil and coin to the father. Rabbi Judah disagrees. According to him, since the father sent the child on such a mission, the father agreed to allow his child to deliver the oil and the change. The Sages agree with Rabbi Judah that the shopkeeper is not liable only in the case where the child came to the store with a flask in his hand. In such a case it is clear that the father intended that the child should deliver the oil, and therefore the shopkeeper will be exempt.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Batra
שהוא פטןר – from the cost of the flask, but the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehuda.
