Bava Metzia 197

ביד עבדו חייב יד עבד כיד רבו

<b><i>GEMARA</i></b>. If he sends it by his [sc. the lender's] servant, [why does the Mishnah state that] he is liable?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If the borrower instructed him to send it. ');">¹</span>

אמר שמואל בעבד עברי דלא קני ליה גופיה רב אמר אפילו תימא בעבד כנעני נעשה כאומר ליה הכישה במקל והיא תבא

Is not the hand of the servant as the hand of his master?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So that it is as though it had never left the lender's possession. ');">²</span>

מיתיבי השואל הפרה ושלחה לו ביד בנו ביד שלוחו חייב ביד עבדו פטור

— Said Samuel: This refers to a Hebrew servant, whose body does not belong to him [his master]. Rab said: It may refer even to a heathen servant, yet it is considered as though he [the borrower] said to him, 'Strike it with a stick and it will come [to me].'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And as soon as it leaves the domain of the owner, the responsibility rests on the borrower. ');">³</span>

בשלמא לשמואל מתניתין בעבד עברי ברייתא בעבד כנעני אלא לרב קשיא

An objection is raised: If one borrows a cow, and sends it to him [the borrower] by his son or agent, he is liable [for accidents on the road]; by his servant, he is not. Now, on Samuel's view it is well: our Mishnah refers to a Hebrew servant; the Baraitha to a heathen servant. But according to Rab, is there not a difficulty? — Rab can answer you: Do not answer [above], it is considered as though he said to him etc.; it means that he had [actually] said to him, 'Strike it with a stick, and it will come.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., in the Mishnah the borrower did instruct the lender to let it come of istelf, whereby he immediately assumed the risks of the road; and he is not freed of the liability merely because the lender sent his servant to accompany it. ');">⁴</span>

אמר לך רב לא תימא נעשה כאמר ליה אלא אימא באמר ליה הכישה במקל והיא תבא

For it has been stated: [If A said to B,] 'Lend me your cow;' and he asked him, 'By whose hand shall [I send it]?' to which he replied, 'Strike it with a stick, and it will come,' said R. Nahman, in the name of Rabbah b. Abbuha in Rab's name: Once it leaves the lender's possession and it dies, he [the borrower] is responsible.

דאיתמר השאילני פרתך וא"ל ביד מי וא"ל הכישה במקל ותבא אמר רב נחמן אמר רבה בר אבוה אמר רב כיון שיצאת מרשות משאיל ומתה חייב

Shall we say that the following [Baraitha] supports him:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Rab. ');">⁵</span>

נימא מסייע ליה השאילני פרתך ואמר ליה ביד מי ואמר ליה הכישה במקל והיא תבא כיון שיצאת מרשות משאיל ומתה חייב

[If A said to B,] 'Lend me your cow, and he asked him, 'By whose hand [shall I send it]?' to which he replied, 'Hit it with a stick, and it will come:' once it leaves the lender's possessions and it dies, he [the borrower] is responsible? — R. Ashi said: [No. For] we deal here with a case where the borrower's court was within the lender's, so that when he sends it, it will certainly go there.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The borrower's courtyard led into the lender's; in that case he assumes responsibility. But if part of the highway is to be traversed, he would not assume responsibility. The Baraitha accordingly affords no support to Rab. ');">⁶</span>

אמר רב אשי הכא במאי עסקינן כגון שהיתה חצרו של שואל לפנים מחצרו של משאיל דכי משלחה לה ודאי להתם אזלא

If so, why state it? — It is necessary to state it only when there are narrow passages [in various directions in the courtyard]. I might think that he [the borrower] does not place full reliance [on its coming to him, for] perhaps it may stand there [sc. in a by-path] and not come to him: therefore we are taught that he places full reliance [that it will come].

אי הכי מאי למימרא לא צריכא דאיכא גזייתא מהו דתימא לא סמכא דעתיה דלמא קיימא התם ולא אתיא אזלא להדיא קמ"ל דסמכא דעתיה

R. Huna said: If a man borrows an axe from his neighbour and he cleaves [wood] therewith, he acquires it; if he does not cleave [wood] therewith, he does not acquire it. In what respect? Shall we say, in respect of [unavoidable] accidents?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., he gains title thereto to be liable for unavoidable accidents. ');">⁷</span>

אמר רב הונא השואל קרדום מחבירו בקע בו קנאו לא בקע בו לא קנאו

But wherein does it differ from a cow, [for which he is responsible] from the time of the loan?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Even before use. ');">⁸</span>

למאי אילימא לאונסין מ"ש פרה דמשעת שאילה אלא לחזרה בקע בו לא מצי הדר ביה משאיל לא בקע בו מצי משאיל הדר ביה

— Hence in respect of returning it. Once he cleaves [wood] therewith, the lender cannot retract;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' But it belongs to the borrower for the whole period of the loan. ');">⁹</span>

ופליגא דרבי אמי דא"ר אמי המשאיל קרדום של הקדש מעל לפי טובת הנאה שבו וחבירו מותר לבקע בו לכתחילה

if not, the lender can retract.

ואי לא קנאו אמאי מעל ואמאי חבירו מותר לבקע בו לכתחילה ניהדריה ולא ליקנייה ולא לימעול

Now, he [R. Huna] is in conflict with R. Ammi. For R. Ammi said: If a man lends an axe belonging to the Sanctuary, he is liable for trespass in respect of its goodwill value, and his neighbour may use it<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'cleave therewith.' ');">¹⁰</span>

ופליגא דר' אלעזר דא"ר אלעזר כדרך שתקנו משיכה בלקוחות כך תקנו משיכה בשומרים

forthwith.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For unwittingly removing an article from the possession of the Sanctuary one had to pay thereto the principal plus a fifth of the value of the benefit of such removal. In this case, his benefit is only the goodwill of the borrower to whom he lent it, upon which a monetary value is placed. Further, having thus removed it from the possession of hekdesh, it becomes hullin (v. Glos.), and therefore the borrower may freely use it, at the very outset, as soon as it comes into his hand. ');">¹¹</span>

תניא נמי הכי כשם שתקנו משיכה בלקוחות כך תקנו משיכה בשומרים וכשם

Now, if he [the borrower] does not acquire it [until he actually uses it], why is he [the lender] liable for trespass, and why may his neighbour use it forthwith? Let him return it, gain no title thereto, and so not be liable for trespass!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hence it follows that in R. Ammi's opinion it becomes the borrower's by the act of meshikah (v. Glos.), even before he uses it. ');">¹²</span> He [R. Huna] is also in conflict with R. Eleazar. For R. Eleazar said: Just as they [the Rabbis] instituted <i>meshikah</i> for purchasers,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As the means of gaining legal possession. ');">¹³</span> so did they institute <i>meshikah</i> for bailees. It has been taught likewise: Just as they instituted <i>meshikah</i> for purchasers, so did they institute <i>meshikah</i> for bailees. And just as