Bava Metzia 96a

בבא מציעא צ״ו ע״א

Learn Bava Metzia 96a step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Bava Metzia 96a in Gemara Clarity

Topic

שאלה בבעלים: why the time of borrowing decides the exemption, what counts as borrowing, and who counts as 'the owner' (partners, husband, agent, slave)

Overview

The גמרא continues discussing שאלה בבעלים, where a borrower is exempt because the owner was working for him. רבא follows רבי יונתן and brings a ברייתא that seems to set two פסוקים against each other. It settles the clash this way: the owner's presence at the time of borrowing is enough, but presence only when the animal is injured or dies is not. After some back-and-forth, the גמרא explains why borrowing is the key moment: from then on the borrower must feed the animal. רב אשי proves the same rule from the words 'מֵעִם רֵעֵהוּ'. רמי בר חמא then asks a series of questions about what counts as borrowing: a sinful use, borrowing just to show off, use worth less than a פרוטה, and two cows worth a פרוטה together. Next come questions about who counts as 'the owner': partners, a husband and wife, an agent, and a slave. The husband and agent questions are tied to older disputes about קנין פירות and שליחות. רבא rules that a slave counts as his master. The amud ends as רמי בר חמא begins a new question about a husband and his wife's property, which continues on the next amud.

Opening lines

The steps (29)

1. Statementרבא follows רבי יונתן: the first verse exempts even when the owner was there only once
2. ChallengeThe second verse seems to make him liable when the owner was there only once
3. ResolutionResolution: presence at the time of borrowing is what counts
4. ChallengeWhy not reverse it?
5. ResolutionBorrowing is weightier because it brings the animal into the borrower's domain
6. ChallengePushback: the moment of injury or death should matter more
7. ResolutionWithout the borrowing, the injury means nothing
8. ChallengeBut without the injury, the borrowing means nothing either
9. ResolutionThe borrowing still wins: the borrower must feed the animal
10. Statementרב אשי proves it from the words of the פסוק
11. ChallengeThen why does the Torah need the later phrases?
12. ResolutionThe later phrases show that 'מֵעִם רֵעֵהוּ' is a real lesson
13. QuestionBorrowing an animal for a forbidden, unusual purpose
14. QuestionBorrowing only to be seen with the item
15. QuestionBorrowing for use worth less than a פרוטה
16. QuestionTwo cows whose work together is worth one פרוטה
17. QuestionBorrowing from two partners when only one partner works for the borrower
18. QuestionTwo partners borrow, and the owner works for only one of them
19. QuestionHusband and wife: does owning the profits count as owning the thing?
20. QuestionDoes an owner's agent working for the borrower count as the owner?
21. ResponseThese questions depend on older disputes
22. StatementSelling a field only for its fruits
23. StatementIs owning the fruits like owning the field?
24. StatementA steward cancels a wife's vows: רבי יאשיה
25. Statementרבי יונתן: a person's agent is like himself
26. Questionרב עיליש asks about lending a slave together with a cow
27. QuestionWhy the slave question works on both sides
28. Responseרבא answers: a slave's hand is like his master's hand
29. Questionרמי בר חמא begins a question about a husband and his wife's property