Responsa for Bava Metzia 115:14
אמר ליה כלפי לייא
R. SIMEON SAID: SACRIFICES FOR WHICH ONE [THE OWNER] BEARS RESPONSIBILITY ARE SUBJECT TO OVERREACHING, THOSE FOR WHICH HE BEARS NO RESPONSIBILITY ARE NOT SUBJECT THERETO. A tanna recited before R. Isaac b. Abba: For sacrifices for which he [the owner] bears responsibility he [a bailee] is liable,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If one entrusts a consecrated animal to another, who denies having received it, and then repents and confesses, he is liable to a guilt offering, as prescribed in Lev. V, 21-25. ');"><sup>26</sup></span> because I can apply to them the verse, [If a soul sin, and commit a trespass] against the Lord and lie;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. 21. By punctuating it thus, it appears that a sacrifice is due when one lies in respect of what is the Lord's, and it was now assumed that the Tanna meant that he is liable because this sacrifice, in respect of which he lied, is regarded as the Lord's property. ');"><sup>27</sup></span> but for those [sacrifices] for which no responsibility is borne, he [a bailee] is not liable, because I read in respect to them, [If a soul sin…] against his neighbour, and lie.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Transposing the order of the text. I.e., those for which the owner bears no responsibility are secular property ('his neighbour's'), whereas it has been shewn that this sacrifice is incurred only on account of God's. ');"><sup>28</sup></span> — Said he to him, 'Whither do you turn?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., your ruling is not in the right direction. Jast.: towards the tail (connecting [H] with [H]) i.e., reverse it! ');"><sup>29</sup></span>
Teshuvot Maharam
A. If Gentile butchers are generally dissatisfied with ritual examiners as slow as A, he must appease the butchers or forfeit his wages as an examiner. If, however, Gentile butchers do not generally resent the slowness of an examiner, and it happens that only the Gentile butchers of that particular town do, A is entitled to the wages of an idle laborer [פועל בטל, i. e., the minimum wages a laborer of A's category would be willing to receive in order to abstain from work] since he was not informed of this condition at the time he was hired.
SOURCES: Pr. 90.
Teshuvot Maharam
A. If the oath has been legally administered by a proper person (who is related neither to R. Moses nor to the inhabitants of Quedlinburg) there is no need for another oath.
This Responsum is addressed to R. Shemariah, and is the second communication regarding this case.
SOURCES: Pr. 231; L. 382; Tesh. Maim. to Haflaah, 1. Cf. P. 514; Mord. Ket. 296–7.
Maharach Or Zarua Responsa
B concedes that A had pawned these articles with him as security for the debt. However, B avers that A refused to allow the former to personally hold the clothing for safekeeping, but insisted that B's daughter L, should guard the clothing, along with her own clothes. B maintains that A had consented to deposit the book with the former, and it is still in his possession. B declares that he will return the book only when A pays his debt.
L alleges that A's clothing was stolen. B contends that he was not responsible for the clothing and insists that A take L, and not the former, to court regarding the return of the clothing.
B disputes A's contention that the pledges were worth more than twice the amount of the debt. B claims he had the pledges appraised beforehand, and had found that they were not even equal to the amount of the debt.
A, however, professes that he had deposited the pledges with B, and avouches that they were valued at twice the amount of the debt. A demands that these pledges be returned by B.
Teshuvot Maharam
A. If the oath has been legally administered by a proper person (who is related neither to R. Moses nor to the inhabitants of Quedlinburg) there is no need for another oath.
This Responsum is addressed to R. Shemariah, and is the second communication regarding this case.
SOURCES: Pr. 231; L. 382; Tesh. Maim. to Haflaah, 1. Cf. P. 514; Mord. Ket. 296–7.