Jeśli ktoś pożyczył krowę i pożyczył od niej jej właściciela, [tj. Jeśli właściciel krowy był z pożyczkobiorcą przy wykonywaniu pracy —czy został przez niego pożyczony, czy wynajęty; czy pracować z krową, czy wykonywać inną pracę]; lub jeśli pożyczył lub wynajął właściciela, a potem pożyczył krowę, a ta zdechła, nie ponosi odpowiedzialności, jak napisano (Wj 22:14): „Jeśli jego właściciel był z nim, nie zapłaci” [sugeruje się, że : Jeśli właściciel wołu był z nim, z pożyczkobiorcą, pożyczano mu lub wynajmowano go do wykonywania pracy, w czasie, gdy pożyczał mu swoją krowę, nie zapłaci.] Ale jeśli pożyczył krowę, a potem pożyczył lub wynajął właściciela, a on umarł, odpowiada, jak napisano (Wj 22:13): „Jeśli jego właściciel nie był z nim, zapłaci”. [Jeśli on (właściciel zwierzęcia) był z nim (pożyczkobiorcą) w czasie wypadku, ale nie w czasie wypożyczenia, on (pożyczkobiorca) ponosi odpowiedzialność, nie jest to „pożyczanie u właściciela” zwolnić go, chyba że był z nim w czasie pożyczania. Werset ten należy rozumieć w następujący sposób: „Jeśli jego właściciel nie był z nim (pożyczkobiorcą)” w momencie pożyczania, nawet gdyby był z nim w chwili zerwania lub śmierci, „zapłaci, powinien zapłacić”. ]
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Metzia
השואל את הפרה ושאל בעלה עמה – if the owners of the cow were with the borrower to do his work, whether they were borrowed with him or rented, whether at the same work of the cow, or whether to do a different [kind of] work, and if the animal died, he is exempt.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Metzia
Introduction
The first mishnah of chapter eight deals with a specific law which is applicable only to borrowers: if the owners were rented or borrowed with their animals, for instance a donkey driver with his donkey, then the borrowers or renters are not obligated if the animal should die.
Mishnah two deals with a person who rents an animal for half a day and borrows it for the other half.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Metzia
שנאמר אם בעליו עמו לא ישלם – and this implies if the owner of the ox was with it, with the borrower, and is borrowed or rented to him to do work at the time that he borrowed his cow, he doesn’t pay.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Metzia
If one borrowed a cow together with the service of its owner, or hired its owner together with the cow, or if he borrowed the service of the owner or hired him, and afterward borrowed the cow, and the cowed died he is not liable, for it is written, “If its owner was with it no restitution need be made” (Exodus 22:14). But if he first borrowed the cow and afterward borrowed or hired the service of its owner, and the cow died, he is liable, for it is written, “Its owner not being with it, he must make restitution” (Exodus 22:13). The Torah clearly states that if the owner of the animal was with the animal when it was borrowed and then it died or was injured the borrower is not obligated to make restitution. The assumption is that the owners should have taken care of the animal and therefore even though the borrower would normally be liable for the animal dying or being injured in this case he is not. Our mishnah clarifies two issues. First of all, it states that the services of the owner need not have been borrowed but may have been hired as well. As long as the cow is borrowed these laws will be applicable. Second, the services of the owner must have been borrowed or hired before the borrowing of the cow. The Rabbis interpret the Torah’s words “with it” or “not being with it” to mean that the owner was in service to the borrower at the time of the borrowing and not afterwards. If the borrower hired or borrowed the services of the owner after having borrowed the cow he will be liable if the cow dies, even if at that time the owner was with the cow.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Metzia
אבל שאל את הפרה כו' – if it was with him at the time of an unavoidable accident, but was not with him at the time of the borrowing, he (i.e., the borrower) is liable, for it was not borrowing with the owners to make him exempt other than if he was with him at the time of the borrowing.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Metzia
Questions for Further Thought: Mishnah one: Why might the Rabbis have interpreted the verses in Exodus 22:13-14 in this way and not in a more literal manner?
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Metzia
שנאמר בעליו אין עמו שלם ישלם – And this is what Scripture teaches us: If the owner is not with it (i.e., the animal) at the time of the borrowing, even if he was with him (i.e., the animal) at the time of breaking a bone or death, he (i.e., the borrower) must surely pay.
