Commentary for Bava Metzia 82:4

ומאן דלא פריך סבר קרנא בלא שבועה עדיפא מכפילא בשבועה

Raba said: [Unlawful] use need not have been mentioned in connection with either an unpaid or a paid bailee, and it could have been inferred from a borrower.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A borrower is responsible for accidents, and when a bailee makes use of his bailment, he automatically becomes in a sense a borrower, but without permission. ');">⁷</span> If a borrower, who in using it acts with its owner's permission, is [nevertheless] responsible [for unpreventable accidents]; surely the same applies to unpaid and paid bailees! Then why is it stated [in connection with these two]? Once, to teach you that [unlawful] use need not involve damage.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [The bailee consequently becomes liable for the whole bailment as soon as he takes it with the intention of putting to use a mere part thereof. This distinguishes him from a borrower authorised or unauthorised, whose liability is limited to the part actually borrowed. V. R. Nissim, Hiddushim, a.l.] ');">⁸</span>

Explore commentary for Bava Metzia 82:4. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.