Bava Metzia 36 - Custodian Finds another Custodian in his Stead

If a custodian transferred a deposit to another custodian without obtaining permission from the owner, then Rav says that it is NOT an act of negligence, and the the first custodian doesn't' acquire any additional liability for losses, since he still guarantees the deposit.

Rabbi Yochanan says that it IS an act of negligence, and that the first custodian is now liable even for unavoidable accidents, for which he was not liable before, because the owner can say to the first custodian, “You are credible to me with an oath, and that second custodian is not.”

The final law agrees with Rabbi Yochanan.

Test your knowledge of the daf

Bava Metzia 35 - A Deposit that was Stolen

If one deposits with another an animal or utensils for safekeeping and they were stolen or lost, the custodian can take an oath that he was not negligent, and free himself from payment. If he did not desire to swear and paid, and then the thief is found, the thief pays the double payment to the custodian.

If one rented a cow and then lent it to another, and it subsequently died a natural death, then the renter is not liable for that, but the borrower is liable to pay to the renter. Rabbi Yossi says that the renter needs to return the value of the cow to the owner.

Test your knowledge of the daf

Bava Metzia 34 - The Four custodians

The four types of custodians are an unpaid custodian, a paid custodian, a renter, and a borrower

• Unpaid custodian must safeguard the object but not use it, and is liable for any loss caused by his negligence;
• Paid custodian also may not use the object, but because he is being paid, he is liable even for theft or loss not due to his negligence;
• Renter pays for the right to use another's property, and his liability is identical to that of the paid custodian;
• Borrower bears the highest degree of responsibility – he is liable even for mishaps beyond his control, with the exception of work-related damages.

Test your knowledge of the daf

Bava Metzia 33 - Suffering of Sentient Beings

One should protect living beings from suffering, as evidenced by the angel rebuking Balaam for striking his she-ass.

But consider this ruling: if one has a choice whether to unload his friend's animal, which is suffering under a load, or to load his enemy's one – he should load his enemy's, in order to subdue his own Evil Inclination. What about the animal suffering? - Subduing one's Evil Inclination is more important.

Retrieving his lost article takes precedence over the lost article of his father or his teacher. A lost article of his teacher takes precedence over that of his father, unless his father is also a Sage.

Test your knowledge of the daf

Bava Metzia 32 - Unloading and Loading

If one saw another person's animal lying under its burden, and he unloaded it, allowing it to get up, and then reloaded the burden upon it, and then shortly thereafter, the animal lay down again, he is still obligated to unload or reload as necessary, for it is stated: “...help, you shall help...”

If the owner impudently walked away and sat down, saying to the bystander, - “Since the commandment to unload my animal is incumbent upon you, if you wish to unload, then unload, but I shall not help you” - the bystander is exempt, for it is stated “...you shall help with him...”

Test your knowledge of the daf

Bava Metzia 31 - What is Considered a Lost Object

How is a finder to determine whether the objects he has found is truly lost? If he found a donkey or a cow grazing by the road, this is not considered a lost object. If he found a donkey with its gear overturned, or a cow running through the vineyards, this is indeed a lost object.

If one returned an animal and it ran away, and this happened four or five times, he is still obligated to return it yet again, because it is stated “...return, you shall return them...” For missed work he gets compensation only as a laborer. But if the stipulates his wage in court, he can get it.

Test your knowledge of the daf

Bava Metzia 30 - When One is not Required to Return a Lost Object

In the verse “You shall not see the ox of your brother or his sheep wandering and hide from them, rather, you shall return them to your brother” the words “...and hide from them...” can be understood to mean that sometimes you do hide from them. For example, an elderly person is not required to pick up an object that is beneath his dignity.

Concerning the areas in which Moses should instruct the Jews, the words “...that they shall do...” refer to maintaining a standard of conduct that goes beyond the letter of the law. Said Rabbi Yochanan: “Jerusalem was destroyed only because Jews didn't go beyond the letter of the law.”

Test your knowledge of the daf

Bava Metzia 29 - How to Take Care of Found Objects

One who finds a lost object is not required to bear the expense of maintaining it until the owner reclaims it. For example, a rooster or calf need to be fed but can not do anything to earn their keep. They should be sold, and the money held for the owner. If an animal works and eats, such as an ox or donkey, it should be put to work for twelve months, then sold. One may use that money, so if it is lost, he is responsible.

If one found books (scrolls), he should read from them once in thirty days, to air them out and prevent their decay.

Test your knowledge of the daf

Bava Metzia 28 - How Lost Objects are Announced

Where in the Torah do we find the idea of returning lost objects by identifying marks? From: “...and it (the lost object) will remain with you until your brother seeks it out...”. Since you can't return it before he asks (seeks) for it, the word “seek” must mean something else – that you must seek out whether he is a liar or not by the use of identifying marks.

Thus a lost Get can be returned if the owner names a sign, such as a hole next to a specific letter.

During the time of the Temple, the finder would announce his find three times, on Passover, Shavuot, and Sukkot, but now it is announced in the neighborhood.

Test your knowledge of the daf

Bava Metzia 27 - Are Identifying Marks Torah Law?

The commandment to return lost objects states “...and so shall you do with his garment...and with any lost article...”

The garment is already included in “any lost article,” so what does it teach? - Just as garment is special in that it has identifying marks and claimants (owners), so too, anything that has identifying marks must be announced. However, one is not obligated to return a lost object that the owner has despaired of recovering. 

Do we see from this ruling that identifying marks are from the Torah? No. The ruling may be mostly interested in the second part, owner's despair, and mention the marks only incidentally.

Test your knowledge of the daf

Bava Metzia 26 - Objects Lost in a Rental house

If one was in the habit of renting his house to others and found lost objects there, they belong to him.  

Normally, they should be returned to the last renter, but here we are dealing with a case of three people renting together. If one of them lost coins and can't find them, he despairs of getting them back. He thinks of the other two: “They probably took the coins and intend to keep them. But if I confront one, he can tell me that it was the other, and I can't make him to take an oath.” Thus the finder can keep them.

Test your knowledge of the daf

Bava Metzia 25 - Found Items One has to Announce

If one finds items with an identifying mark, he can presume that the owner has not despaired of recovering them, hence he has to announce the find and return it to owner. Examples include produce in a vessel, or a vessel as is, homemade loaves of bread, jugs of wine, and jugs of oil – these used to have individual seals. 

If one found behind a wall – which provides partial protection - young pigeons that were tied, he should not touch them. Perhaps a person put them there, and if the finder takes them and announces them, the owner may not have signs to claim them.

Test your knowledge of the daf

Bava Metzia 24 - Going Beyond the Letter of the Law

Rav Yehudah was following behind the master, Shmuel, in the market of cereal stores. He asked Shmuel, “If one found a purse here, what is the law?” Shmuel said, “It belongs to the finder.” Many people pass by here, and one of them is likely to take it. Thus, the owner despairs. 

Rav Yehudah continued, “If a Jew comes and gives an identifying mark for it, what is the law?” Shmuel said, “He is obligated to return it.” How can both rulings be true? The second statement reflects a moral obligation of going beyond the letter of the law.

Test your knowledge of the daf

Bava Metzia 23 - Basic Rules of Lost Objects

Once the owner has said, “Woe to me for the monetary loss I have sustained,” or expressed his belief in the hopelessnesses of recovering the lost object in any manner, he has given up hope of ever recovering it, and whoever finds it now may keep it. 

If one finds objects that have an identifying mark, or sign (siman), the finder is obligated to announce his find. The sign can be weight, bundle count, or location where it was lost. 

If objects without a sign look like they have been left by the owner, the finder announces them, lest the people who don't observe this law will take them.

Test your knowledge of the daf

Bava Metzia 22 - Despair without being Aware

Consider the following ruling: “If a thief, who takes in secret, stole from one and gave to the other, the recipient may keep the goods. Similarly, if a robber, who robs openly, took from one and gave to the other, again the recipient may keep it.

The case of a robber is understandable - the owner despairs of getting his things back, and the recipient thus acquires them. But in the case of a thief the owner is not aware of his loss! It must be that the despair which will come later is already effective, just like Rava and not Abaye? No! The “thief” is an armed robber, who is like a thief in that he hides – so here too the owner despairs.

Bava Metzia 21 - Lost Objects that the Finder May Keep

When an object without an identifying mark is lost, the owner despairs of recovering it, because he knows that even if it is found, he will be unable to prove that it is his. Therefore the following objects belong to the finder: scattered produce, scattered coins, small sheaves in a public domain, round cakes of pressed figs, baker's loaves.

When someone loses such an object but before he discovers his loss - Rava says that the object is already abandoned, but Abaye disagrees. The law in this case follows Abaye: until the owner has consciously despaired of recovering the lost object, the finder is not permitted to keep it.

This is the "Y" in the six cases abbreviated Y A L K G M where the law follows Abaye against Rava.

Bava Metzia 20 - The Found Documents That Are Returned

If one found letters of assignement (official letter stating that a property was assessed and confiscated to satisfy a debt), letters of sustenance (certifying that a husband has agreed to provide for his stepdaughter's support), certificates of Halitza or any act of the court, he should return these to the party named in them to receive the document.

There is no concern here that the documents were written in advance, because the courts do not draw documents in advance. 

If one found a loan document belonging to others among his documents, it should be set aside until Elijah the Prophet comes and resolves its ownership.

Test your knowledge of the daf

Bava Metzia 19 - How to Write a Will under the Torah Law

Wills are not valid under Torah law; upon a person's death, all property passes to his natural heirs. One of the possible correct ways is to to stipulate that the gift takes effect “from today and after death.”

Under this clause, the gift is granted to its beneficiary in two stages: the property itself is granted immediately, the benefactor thereby relinquishing his right to transfer it to anyone else. However, the right to the property's yield (i.e. including such things as produce and rental income) is not granted to the beneficiary until the benefactor's death. Thus the benefactor continues to enjoy the use of his property for the reminder of his life.

Test your knowledge of the daf

Bava Metzia 18 - One Found Bills of Divorce, Sickbed Will, Etc.

If one found bills of divorce, or bills of emancipation of slaves, or sickbed wills, or gift documents, or receipts – he should not return them to the recipients named on them. It is possible that they were written with the intent to give them, but the author reconsidered and decided not to give them, and it was he who lost them. The above documents effect the transaction, thus, if the writer lost them, they don't take effect.

Wills are generally not effective in Torah law; unless formal gift has been made before death, property passes automatically to the rightful heirs defined by the Torah. Sickbed will is an exception.

Test your knowledge of the daf

Bava Metzia 17 - One is not Believed About his Debt

If a creditor tells to his debtor, “You owe me a maneh (100 zuz, $5000), and the debtor says, “I owe you nothing because I never borrowed,” and witnesses testify against the debtor that he did borrow, and subsequently the debtor said, “I paid this debt” - he is presumed a liar in reference to that money, and without providing witnesses he is not believed that he repaid.

A monetary obligation imposed by the court, such as Ketubah, has the strength of a document, and without witnesses one is not believed to claim that he repaid it.

Test your knowledge of the daf

Bava Metzia 16 - When the Found Loan Document IS Returned

If one finds a loan document that is certified in court, he should return it to the creditor. Usually it is the creditor who certifies the note. If the borrower had repaid the money, he should have ripped the document right there, and if he didn't do so, he brought undue loss on himself.

According to the letter of the law, the land, once repossessed, need not be returned to the debtor when he wants to repay his loan. And it is only because of “You shall do that which is fair and good in the eyes of God”  that the Sages said that the land must be returned.

Test your knowledge of the daf

Bava Metzia 15 - Repossession of a Stolen Field

If one sells a field to his fellow and it is discovered that the field was not his to sell – that the seller had stolen the field – and the rightful owner repossesses the field, the defrauded seller has the right to compensation for his money by suing the seller.

However he has no right for the value of the improvement to the land, such as a crop or a house. Since the field was never his, the purchase money is considered a loan. The payment for improvement looks like interest which is forbidden – says Shmuel. The accepted ruling is that the purchaser has the right to improvements.

Test your knowledge of the daf

Bava Metzia 14 - Power of Attorney

If Reuven sold a field to Shimon with a guarantee (Reuven agreed to refund Shimon's money in the event the field is collected by Reuven's creditors), and Reuven's creditor comes and attempts to collect the field from Shimon in payment of Reuven's obligation, the law is that Reuven may go and argue the case with the creditor to prevent him to collect the field. And the creditor may not tell Reuven, “You have not standing in the matter.”

But otherwise, anyone who has no standing cannot argue the case in court, and attorney representation is disallowed, and so decides Shulchan Aruch. Other opinions, however, allow power of attorney.

Test your knowledge of the daf

Bava Metzia 13 - Loans and Real Estate

If one found notes of indebtedness, he should not return them neither to the creditor nor to the borrower.

If the creditor has the note, he can use the note as evidence that the debt has not yet been paid. If the debtor has the note, he can produce it to prove that the debt has been repaid. Thus, if the debtor does not admit to the loan, the note can't be returned.

Furthermore, a loan creates a lien on the properties sold by the debtor after the loan has been made. Even if the debtor admits to the loan, it can't be return, because the creditor and the debtor may have colluded to defraud the buyers of these properties.

Test your knowledge of the daf

Bava Metzia 12 - To Whom the Finds Belong

If an owner of a purse declared it ownerless, and then threw it through someone's house, so that it entered one door and exited through another, does the houseowner acquire the purse with the "courtyard" acquisition? - This was left unanswered.

The find of one's dependent son or daughter, of one's Canaanite slave, male or female, and of one's wife - these belong to him, some from the Torah, and some by Rabbinical enactment. The find of one's independent son or daughter, of one's Hebrew servant or maidservant, and of one's wife whom he divorced, although he has not yet paid her Ketubah - these belong to them.

Test your knowledge of the daf

Bava Metzia 11 - Acquisition with the Help of a Field

If one saw people running after a find, after a lame deer, or after young pigeons that cannot yet fly, and said, “My field has acquired it for me,” - it has indeed acquired it for him. If the deer was running normally, or if the pigeons were flying, and he said, “My field has acquired it for me,” - he has said nothing.

This method of acquisition is called “courtyard.”  The owner doesn't have to declare his intention – it is only stated to emphasize the second case in the ruling. He does have to stand next to his field, making it comparable to a courtyard.

Test your knowledge of the daf

Bava Metzia 10 - How to Get Things

If someone saw a find, an ownersless article, and fell upon it  - and another came and seized it, the one who seized it has acquired it. Formal methods of acquisition, or coming into legal possession of a movable object, include lifting it, but they do not include falling on it.

Later, Rabbis instituted another method of acquisition, where four cubits (about 6 feet) would acquire ownerless objects for the person, so that people would not come to quarrel with one another. Then why in the case above he didn't acquire through the four cubits rule? Because it works only in the public area, but he was in someone's field.

Test your knowledge of the daf

Bava Metzia 9 - Rider Sees a Find

If someone was riding on an animal and he sighted a find, an ownerless article, and he said to his fellow, who was standing nearby, “Give it to me,” and that other person took it and then said “I have acquired it for myself,” - he has indeed acquired it for himself. It is implied that he had it in mind when he picked it up, not that he changed his mind later.

If, however, after he had given it to the rider, he said “I acquired it first,” he has said nothing, that is, his claim is dismissed and the rider may keep it.

Test your knoweldge of the daf

Bava Kamma 8 - One Lifts a Found Object, Intending to Acquire it for his Fellow

If one lifts up an object that he found, intending to acquire it entirely for his fellow, then his fellow acquires it. This is true even though he thereby deprives other potential finders of the object. It can be proved from the case of two people who have found a garment.

There each one is holding his end of the garment, and should his fellow drop it, the garment would partially rest on the floor, which would mean that our claimant has not acquired it either, since complete lifting is required. We must conclude that when they lift the garment, both intend to help the other one acquire it.

Test your knowledge of the daf

Bava Metzia 7 - Two People Found a Document

If two persons, a creditor and a debtor, appear in court holding on to a note of indebtedness, and the creditor says, “It is mine: it fell from me and I subsequently found it,” but the debtor says, “It was indeed yours, however I repaid the debt to you,” - then the witnesses who appear on the document must certify that the document is indeed authentic, and they divide it with an oath, just like in the case of a garment.

Why is the certification needed if the debtor admits that the document is valid? Because if we believe him on that, we should also believe that he repaid, or else we need to confirm the document independently.

Test your knowledge of the daf

Bava Metzia 6 - Why Accept An Oath?

Why does the litigant accept the oath of his opponent in lieu of payment? Doesn't he himself claim that his opponent is a thief, such as in the case of two people with a garment, and just as he claims that his opponent lied about money, he can suspect that his opponent will take a false oath?

That argument however is false. There are people who will withdraw from taking a doubtful oath, but will not withdraw from taking doubtful money. And what is the reason for this difference in attitude? Money taken improperly can be returned, but an oath once uttered cannot be recalled.

Test your knoweldge of the daf