Bava Kamma 232

להביא כרוב ודורמסקנין לחולה והלך ומצאו שמת או שהבריא נותן לו שכרו משלם

to bring cabbage or <i>damascene</i><span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [G]; Lat. 'Damascina'. ');">¹</span> plums for a sick person, and by the time he arrived he found him already dead or fully recovered, his hire<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which owing to the need of the occasion was above the ordinary; cf. Tosaf. a.l. ');">²</span>

א"ל מי דמי התם עביד שליח שליחותיה הכא לא עביד שליח שליחותיה:

would have to be paid in full'?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Tosef. B.M. VII 2. Does this not prove that even where the efforts proved unsuccessful the payment must still be in full? ');">³</span> — He replied: What comparison is there? In that case the messenger performed his errand,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As he indeed fetched the required objects. ');">⁴</span>

ת"ר שיירא שהיתה מהלכת במדבר ועמד עליה גייס לטורפה מחשבין לפי ממון ואין מחשבין לפי נפשות

whereas here the messenger did not perform his errand.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For he did not rescue the ass. ');">⁵</span> Our Rabbis taught: If a caravan was travelling through the wilderness and a band of robbers threatened to plunder it, the contribution to be paid by each [for buying them off] will be apportioned in accordance with his possessions [in the caravan,] but not in accordance with the number of persons there.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For the robbers came originally for the possessions and not necessarily for souls. ');">⁶</span>

ואם שכרו תייר ההולך לפניהם מחשבין אף לפי נפשות ולא ישנו ממנהג החמרין

But if they hire a guide to go in front of them, the calculation will have to be made also<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'Also' is missing in J. B.M. VI, 4. ');">⁷</span> according to the number of souls in the caravan,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For a guide is vital also to safeguard life; as to possessions cf. the difference in reading between the text here and J. B.M. VI, 4. ');">⁸</span>

רשאין החמרין להתנות שכל מי שיאבד לו חמורו יעמיד לו חמור אחר בכוסיא אין מעמידין שלא בכוסיא מעמידין לו ואם אמר תנו לי ואני אשמור אין שומעין לו

though they have no right to deviate from the general custom of the ass-drivers.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Tosef. B.M. VII; cf. B.B. 7b, 8b. ');">⁹</span> The ass-drivers are entitled to stipulate that one who loses his ass should be provided with another ass.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., a kind of insurance. ');">¹⁰</span>

פשיטא לא צריכא דאית ליה חמרא אחרינא מהו דתימא הא קא מינטר ליה קמ"ל שאני נטירותא דחד מנטירותא דבי תרי:

[If, however, this was caused] by negligence, they would not have to provide him with another ass; where this was done without any negligence [on his part], he is provided with another ass. If he said: Give me the money for the ass and I will [buy it myself and]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [So MS.M.] ');">¹¹</span> in any case guard the asses,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In accordance with the custom that each ass-driver had in turn to look after all the asses together with his own. ');">¹²</span>

ת"ר ספינה שהיתה מהלכת בים עמד עליה נחשול לטובעה והקילו ממשאה מחשבין לפי משאוי ואין מחשבין לפי ממון ולא ישנו ממנהג הספנים

we do not listen to him.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For he might not buy another ass and thus have no longer any interest in looking after the other asses. Tosef. B.M. XI. ');">¹³</span> Is this not obvious? — No; this is a case where he possesses another ass, and where therefore I might have said that since he has in any case to guard it<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Together with the asses of the other drivers. ');">¹⁴</span>

ורשאין הספנים להתנות שכל מי שאבדה לו ספינה יעמיד לו ספינה אחרת אבדה לו בכוסיא אין מעמידין שלא בכוסיא מעמידין לו ואי פירש למקום שאין הספינות הולכין אין מעמידין

[his request should be complied with]: we are therefore told that there is a difference between guarding one and guarding two.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As when he has two asses of his own among those of the other drivers he will put more heart into his work. ');">¹⁵</span> Our Rabbis taught: If a boat was sailing on the sea and a gale arose threatening to sink it so that it became necessary to lighten the cargo, the apportionment [of the loss of each passenger] will have to be made according to the weight of the cargo<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Though one might be asked to throw away gold and another a similar weight of copper. ');">¹⁶</span>

פשיטא לא צריכא דבניסן מרחקי חד אשלא ובתשרי מרחקי תרי אשלי וקא אזיל ביומי ניסן למקום תשרי מהו דתימא דוושיה נקיט ואזיל קמ"ל

and not according to the value of the cargo, though they should not deviate from the general custom of mariners.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Tosef. B.M. VII; cf. B.B. 7b, 8b. ');">⁹</span> The mariners are entitled to stipulate that one who loses his boat should be provided with another boat. If this was caused by his fault, they would not have to provide him with another boat, but if without negligence he is provided with another boat. So also if he sailed to a place where boats should not go [and thus lost his boat] they would not have to provide him with another one.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Tosef. B.M. XI, 12. ');">¹⁷</span>

ת"ר שיירא שהיתה מהלכת במדבר ועמד גייס וטרפה ועמד אחד מהן והציל הציל לאמצע ואם אמר אני אציל לעצמי הציל לעצמו

But is this not obvious? — No; [there may be a place where] during Nisan<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 25, nn, 6-7. ');">¹⁸</span> they generally sail one rope's length away from the shore, whereas during Tishri<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 25, nn, 6-7. ');">¹⁸</span>

היכי דמי אי דיכול להציל אפילו סיפא נמי לאמצע ואי דלא יכול להציל אפילו רישא נמי לעצמו

they sail two ropes' length away from the shore,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On account of the shallowness of the water soon after the hot summer period. ');">¹⁹</span> and it so happened here that during Nisan<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When there is an abundance of water in the river. ');">²⁰</span>

אמר רמי בר חמא הכא בשותפין עסקינן וכגון זה שותף חולק שלא לדעת חבירו אמר פליג לא אמר לא פליג

he sailed in the place fit for sailing during Tishri.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., far away from the shore; for a transposed text v. Shittah Mekubezeth. ');">²¹</span> In this case it might be argued that [as] he took his wanted course in sailing,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' He should not be considered careless. ');">²²</span>

רבא אמר הכא בפועלין עסקינן וכרב דאמר רב פועל יכול לחזור בו אפילו בחצי היום

[he should still be provided with another boat]; we are therefore told [that this is not the case]. Our Rabbis taught: If a caravan was travelling in the desert and a band of robbers threatened to plunder it, and one member of the caravan rose and rescued [some of their belongings], whatever he rescued will go to the respective owners,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'to the common fund' which will indeed be so according to the interpretation of Rami b. Hama which follows on. ');">²³</span>

וכמה דלא הדר ביה כברשותיה דבעל הבית דמי וכי הדר ביה טעמא אחרינא הוא דכתיב (ויקרא כה, נה) כי לי בני ישראל עבדים ולא עבדים לעבדים

whereas if he said at the beginning, 'I am going to rescue for myself', whatever he rescued would belong to himself.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Tosef. B.M., VIII. ');">²⁴</span> What are the circumstances? If [the other owners were] able to rescue their belongings,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In which case they certainly did not give them up. ');">²⁵</span>

רב אשי אמר כשיכול להציל ע"י הדחק גלי דעתיה לעצמו לא גלי דעתיה לאמצע:

why even in the second case should the rescued belongings not go to the respective owners?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For how did he acquire title to them. ');">²⁶</span> If on the other hand no [other owner was] able to rescue [anything],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In which case they surely gave up any hope of retaining their belongings and thus abandoned them, as supra p. 686. ');">²⁷</span>

<big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> הגוזל שדה מחבירו ונטלוה מסיקין אם מכת מדינה היא אומר לו הרי שלך לפניך אם מחמת הגזלן חייב להעמיד לו שדה אחר:

why even in the first case should they not belong to the man himself?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As he became possessed of ownerless property. ');">²⁸</span> — Said Rami b. Hama: We are dealing here with partners, and [in an emergency] like this,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where a loss of property is imminent. ');">²⁹</span>

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק מאן דתני מסיקין לא משתבש ומאן דתני מציקין לא משתבש מאן דתני מציקין לא משתבש דכתיב (דברים כח, נג) במצור ובמצוק

a partner may dissolve partnership even without the knowledge of his fellow: so that where he made a stipulation [as in the concluding clause], the partnership has been dissolved,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' He may thus retain the property he rescued to the extent of his part. ');">³⁰</span> whereas if no stipulation was made [as in the first clause] the partnership has not yet been dissolved.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And whatever he rescued will go to the common fund. ');">³¹</span>

ומאן דתני מסיקין לא משתבש דכתיב (דברים כח, מב) יירש הצלצל ומתרגמינן יחסניניה סקאה:

Raba, however, said that we are dealing here with labourers,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who were hired by the caravan and who rescued the threatened property. ');">³²</span> and the ruling follows the view of Rab, for Rab said that a labourer<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., a day labourer. ');">³³</span>

אם מחמת הגזלן חייב: היכי דמי אילימא דאנסוה לארעא דידיה ולא אנסוה כולי ארעתא הא מרישא שמעת מינה אם מכת מדינה היא כו' אי לא לא

is entitled to withdraw even in the middle of the day.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' B.M. 10a. ');">³⁴</span> Hence so long as he did not withdraw, [whatever he rescues is regarded] as being in the possession of the employer, whereas after he had already withdrawn it is a different matter altogether,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For then he works for himself and since the owners were unable to rescue their property it became abandoned so that when rescued by the labourer he acquired title to it. ');">³⁵</span>

לא צריכא דאחוי אחוויי לישנא אחרינא הב"ע כגון דאנסוה עכו"ם ואמרי ליה אחויי ארעתיה ואחוי ההוא בהדייהו

as it is written: For unto me the Children of Israel are servants; they are my servants,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXV, 55. ');">³⁶</span> but not servants to servants.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Unlike in the case of the Hebrew servant of Ex. XXI, 2 the employer has no right in rem with reference to his labourers; cf. Kid. 16a and also 22b. ');">³⁷</span>

ההוא גברא דאחוי אכריא דחטי דבי ריש גלותא אתא לקמיה דרב נחמן חייביה רב נחמן לשלומי יתיב רב יוסף אחוריה דרב הונא בר חייא ויתיב רב הונא בר חייא קמיה דרב נחמן א"ל רב הונא בר חייא לרב נחמן דינא או קנסא

R. Ashi said: [We are dealing here with a case] where [any other owner would be] able to rescue [the property] only with great difficulty, so that where he [the one who did the work of rescue] declared his intention,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., that he does it for himself; and as the owner who was present there neither contradicted him nor made any exertion to rescue it, the property became ownerless. ');">³⁸</span> the belongings rescued will go to him, whereas where he did not declare his intention they will go to their respective owners.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For under such circumstances there could not be traced there any implied Renunciation on their part. ');">³⁹</span>

א"ל מתניתין היא דתנן אם מחמת הגזלן חייב להעמיד לו שדה ואוקימנא דאחוי אחוויי בתר דנפק א"ל רב יוסף לרב הונא בר חייא מאי נפקא לך מיניה

<b><i>MISHNAH</i></b>. IF A MAN ROBBED ANOTHER OF A FIELD AND BANDITTI [MASSIKIN]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H] V. B.M. (Sonc. ed.) p. 576, n. 5. ');">⁴⁰</span> CONFISCATED IT, IF THIS BLOW BEFELL THE WHOLE PROVINCE<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., they confiscated other's fields too. ');">⁴¹</span> HE MAY SAY TO HIM, 'HERE IS THINE BEFORE THEE'; BUT IF IT WAS CAUSED THROUGH THE ROBBER HIMSELF HE WOULD HAVE TO PROVIDE HIM WITH ANOTHER FIELD. <b><i>GEMARA</i></b>. R. Nahman b. Isaac said: One who reads here MASSIKIN<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. supra p. 694, n. 12. ');">⁴²</span> is not in error, while one who reads 'Mezikin' is similarly not in error: One who reads 'Mezikin' is not in error as it was written:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XXVIII, 57. ');">⁴³</span> In the siege and mazok [straitness];<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., oppression. ');">⁴⁴</span> so also he who reads MASSIKIN is not in error as it is written: The locust [shall] consume,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. 42. ');">⁴⁵</span> which is translated,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In Targum Onkelos a.l.; cf. however Rashi there. ');">⁴⁶</span> 'The sakkah [sack-carrier]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So Jast. The name of a locust or a beetle; v. Ta'an. 6a; according however to R. Tam it refers to the enemy. ');">⁴⁷</span> shall inherit<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Isa. XXXIV, 11. ');">⁴⁸</span> it.' BUT IF IT WAS CAUSED THROUGH THE ROBBER HIMSELF, HE WOULD HAVE TO PROVIDE HIM WITH ANOTHER FIELD. How are we to understand this? If only this field was confiscated, while all the other fields were not confiscated, could this not be derived from the earlier clause which says: IF THIS BLOW BEFELL THE WHOLE PROVINCE [HE MAY SAY TO HIM 'HERE IS THINE BEFORE THEE'], which implies that if this was not so, the ruling would be otherwise? — No; it is necessary to state the law where he [did not actually misappropriate the field but merely] pointed it out<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'showed it'. ');">⁴⁹</span> [to the banditti to confiscate it]. According to another explanation we are dealing here with a case where e.g. heathens demanded of him<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., of an actual robber. ');">⁵⁰</span> with threats to show them his fields and he showed them also this field among his own. A certain person showed [to robbers] a heap of wheat that belonged to the house of the Exilarch. He was brought before R. Nahman and ordered by R. Nahman to pay. R. Joseph happened to be sitting at the back of R. Huna b. Hiyya, who was sitting in front of R. Nahman. R. Huna b. Hiyya said to R. Nahman: Is this a judgment or a fine? — He replied: This is the ruling in our Mishnah, as we have learnt: IF IT WAS CAUSED THROUGH THE ROBBER HIMSELF HE WOULD HAVE TO PROVIDE HIM WITH ANOTHER FIELD, which we interpreted to refer to a case where he showed [the field to bandits]. After R. Nahman had gone, R. Joseph said to R. Huna b. Hiyya: 'What difference does it make