Commento su Bava Metzia 3:2
הַשּׂוֹכֵר פָּרָה מֵחֲבֵרוֹ וְהִשְׁאִילָהּ לְאַחֵר, וּמֵתָה כְדַרְכָּה, יִשָּׁבַע הַשּׂוֹכֵר שֶׁמֵּתָה כְדַרְכָּה, וְהַשּׁוֹאֵל יְשַׁלֵּם לַשּׂוֹכֵר. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, כֵּיצַד הַלָּה עוֹשֶׂה סְחוֹרָה בְּפָרָתוֹ שֶׁל חֲבֵרוֹ, אֶלָּא תַחֲזֹר פָּרָה לַבְּעָלִים:
Se uno assumeva una mucca dal suo vicino e la prestava ad un altro [con il permesso del proprietario (poiché noi governiamo che un osservatore che dà a un altro senza permesso è responsabile)], e moriva normalmente, il locatario giura [al proprietario] che è morto normalmente, [ed è esente dal pagamento, un locatario è esente (dal pagamento) per incidenti (come la morte)], e il mutuatario, [che è responsabile per gli incidenti] paga il locatario. R. Yossi ha detto: Se è così, lui (il locatario) "fa affari" con la mucca del suo vicino! Piuttosto (pagamento per) la mucca viene restituita al proprietario. [L'halachah è conforme a R. Yossi.]
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Metzia
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Metzia
Rabbi Yose said: “How can this one make business out of his friend’s cow? Rather [the value of the cow] returns to the owner.”
Mishnah two deals with the liability of a person who rents a cow and then subsequently loans the cow to someone else and the cow dies.
Mishnah three deals with a person who admits to having stolen or otherwise received money from one of two people but does not know from which one.
As we learned in the introduction to mishnah one, a renter is not liable to pay back the owner if the rented animal dies a natural death. In such a case he is allowed to take an oath and be exempt. The borrower, on the other hand, is liable to pay back the value of the borrowed animal even if it dies a natural death. In our mishnah a renter loaned the rented cow to a third party and then the cow died. The renter may take an oath that the cow died a natural death and he is exempt. The borrower, however, is liable to pay the value of the cow. Since he borrowed from the renter he must repay the renter.
Rabbi Yose claims that such a law allows the renter to make unfair profit from the cow that belongs to someone else. In his opinion the value of the cow should be paid from the borrower directly to the original owner. In other words, although the renter can exempt himself from paying by taking an oath, he does not thereby earn the rights to future benefits accrued from the animal.