Commentary for Bava Metzia 196:8

את"ל שכירה בשאלה מישך שייכי שכרה בבעלים שאלה שלא בבעלים מהו

Or perhaps, being partly related thereto, it is wholly related thereto. And should you rule that we do maintain that partial relationship is regarded as complete relationship, what if one borrowed it with the owners [service], hired it without the owner's, and borrowed it again [without the owner]? Does the borrowing revert to its former status? Or perhaps, the hiring breaks the connection? [Likewise,] if it was hired with the owner's [service], then borrowed, and then hired again [the last two without] — do we Say, the hiring reverts to its former status? Or perhaps, the intermediate borrowing breaks the connection? These problems remain unsolved.

Explore commentary for Bava Metzia 196:8. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.