Gemara Markings Daf Yomi
Bava Metzia 41b
"Man alif almud alif", 14 lines from the bottom, last one is "Tistayim". We marked along point, marketing is about a 10 line point and we had two names, Rav and Lavi, and two opinions. Let's try to match up Tistayim. Can we not conclude that it's Rav who to Ammar? He's the one who says that that which there's a high level of liability if you are supposed to be watching someone else's thing and you do a schlichussiad or you steal it or whatever it is, but just stick with a schaichussiad. Enecichussiad doesn't actually have to be a loss or a depreciation or a genuine using part of it and Rav would be the one who says that there would already be a high level of liability even without a schichussiad. Here's a price of the price it goes for almost three lines. Rya Shahiar Rya Edra. Let's say you have a shepherd, they would often be watching other people's sheep. Vinhira Edra, you bow the ear and he leaves his flock and he goes into the city. Ubaz the eve, Vataraf, Ubaz, Uba, Arribadaras and either a wolf comes and rips apart and takes back to their hiding place. One of the sheep, Ubaz, Arribadaras or lion comes and tears it apart right there and eats it. The shepherd would be putter. Kama, he niyachmakalai, or tarmilo alla. If he had placed his staff or his shepherd pouch on the sheep, then he would be Haiv, liable to compensate for that sheep. That's the end of the snake source. Connector Vavina, bun we ask. Really? Mishum, he niyachmakalai, the tarmilo, the Haiv, just because at some point he had leaned his staff up, let's say against that sheep, he would be liable. Question mark, ha ha. Shuklinu, but he took them back. He took his staff back. He took his his pouch back. Vavina, we added Vavina in there. Vavina, Arribadarav, Arribadarav, Arribadarav. Oh, here's Rav. He's one of our two names. Let's circle Rav. We're talking about where, let's say, his staff is still leaning on the animal. Now, look where it says, well, one second, Kamavaki. Oh, you didn't know that, huh? Okay, so his staff is still leaning up against the animal. My Haivi, well, like, okay, so what? Question mark, ha ha, lo y Masha. He never did a formal act of acquisition. He never, like, did a meshira on the animal. Vavina Roshmabarav, Yitzlak Amarav, Shahecha Be-makal. He hit the animal with a stick. There, Rosh, it's all the fauna, then it went to run it in front of him, and that's how he acquired it. Kama, connector, but where do we see that he caused any loss or lacking or took something away from the animal? We didn't see that. Vahalai Kastra. Oh, Kama, Elavashramaina. Rather, should we not conclude from here, Kissavar, that Rav is of the opinion, that Shlikus, yeah, that higher level of liability for somebody who doesn't have to actually cause a depreciation debt. I'm just using it. Ain't that Shlikusan Saran does not require any depreciation. That's the end of the Gmara's long point, that it seems that it would be Rav, Hul Shlikusa, does not need a Kissavaran. Turns around the Gmara after all that and says, "Actually, no. Ema, I could tell you that what we had is the first word on the line. One line ago, Shehek Kisha, is to hit. Actually, the word that should be there is Shehek Kisha Bimaka. Not that he just gave it a hit with the state, but rather he weakened it. That would depreciate the value of the animal. He gave it such a hard, such a hard hit that it actually caused the animal to be worth less. Deikandami, an actually precise reading of this, will bring out the point. Dama Rav, for Rav had said, the Gersa changes this, Shehek Kisha. It could have just said that he hit it, but essentially Heesha Bimaka with a stick. Shmami, no. There's a big difference between, you know, hitting somebody on the back with your palm or hitting some of the back with a baseball bat. So you know, baseball bat, you assume it's much harder, almost a damaging type of blow. Okay, so we figured out that it is Rav, who would say Shri Kusyad needs Atisaran. Well, Umi De Rav, Sava Shri Kusyad, Shri Kusyad, Kama Lavi, his bar-plugta, the other opinion on the issue, must hold Shri Kusyad. Ina Shri Kusyad, you have that higher level of liability for somebody, even though he did actually cause the depreciation of the animal question. Okay, my time at the Lavi, what would be Lavi's reasoning for that? Well, I'm Rabioh Khanani, I'm not Rabioh Khanani, I'm Rabiosi Nihara, and I circled Rabiosi Nihara. Now we're also on Ahmed Bayes going to, I actually wrote in above the first two words that Ahmed Bayes. The anime I wrote in Rabioh Khanani circled it, and then about seven lines later, first words on the line are Kereba Lazar, and I circled that. And then about five lines later is Rava, I circled him. So we're gonna have a few opinions on this issue. We ask now, back to the line before the end of Mimala Kamalalaf, what's the reason for it? Lavi says, Rabioh Khanani, Rabiosi Nihara, Mishu Nihara, Shri Kusyad, that is stated Ha'Mura, Bisham Rachinaam, Me, Shri Kusyad, Ha'Mura, Bisham Rachinaam. Different, unusual, not similar one to the other, is the Shri Kusyad that the terror talks about in Shmai's parakaf Bayes. Those are sakim tests, yud, yud, all of yud Bayes, by Eishamir Sakhar. That is somebody who's hired to watch an item, and then goes and uses it. Me, Shri Kusyad, when compared to the usage Ha'Mura that is said by the turin Shmai's Ha'Mura Bayes, but the sakim earlier, Vav, Zain, and Rez, by Eishamir Chinaam. In other words, they're not similar one to the other, the Shri Kusyad, had to be said, and you couldn't learn it other than if there's a shi Kusyad, but the Shri Kusyad Sakhar was actually being paid, that didn't have to be told us. Why didn't have to be told us? Because we would know it. Vav, Nihara, says Rab, Yohannan, Aiswil Anulan, Vav, Nihara, Ina, Mishu Nihara, that it is, not Mishu. Okay, so we have a maklokas here. Rabiosi ben Nihara, Yohannan's Rabbi, said one way of learning Mishu Nihara, and Rabiosi ben Nihara, said it's not Mishu Nihara. Now, the Gomor wants to clarify, what's the way of looking at the Mishu Nihara, where it seems that it's unusual, and what's the way that's not unusual. So, my Mishu Nih, I put a diamond around the my Mishu Nihara, and six lines later, in the middle line, it says Vani, Aimir, and Aisay. So, it's going to be again, Rabiohannan, I think, is explaining all of this, is explaining what Rabiosi ben Nihara, I would say, and what he would say. So, back on the first line of Mishu Nihara, my Mishu Nihara, how would you understand the Sukhim, and it would be unusual? Well, it told us two times, this concept of Shri Khusyad, once by a Shimer Sakhhar, that somebody is watching something for wages, and once by Shimer Krena, who's watching it for free. So, Loi Taimar, this is what's unusual about it. Let the Pazu Nihara say anything by Shri Khusyad, by a Shimer Sakhhar. The guy's actually getting paid, I don't know, $100 a day to watch the thing, and don't tell us anything in the Pazu Nihaschulyad, Vitese, and I would learn it, I'd like automatically know it, it would be obvious. Me, Shimer Krena, I'm calling a night say like this, "Mah, Shimer Krena, if Bob is watching someone's thing for free, she'll possibly be evaded if he gets stolen or lost, Bob's not liable yet." Shalak Bahyad, if he uses the item, then he would be Khayyiv, then Kama, sitently, a Shimer Sakhhar, when you do them with somebody who's actually getting paid to watch the item, that he is Khayyiv big name, if he gets stolen or if he gets lost, he's liable. Loi Koshik, not all the more so, that if he's Shalak Bahyad, he's certainly going to be Khayyiv in whatever ends him there are. In other words, I would have known that logically, Kama, the Mai Hilsa Kasvin Rachman, and then why do the person have to tell me that, if I could have known it via logic, to come to tell you the idea that Shri Khus Yad, not only if there's a loss, but even if there's not a loss that's still going to put the high level of liability on the Shalak Bahyad, Ena Shri Khus Yad, Ena Shri Saar, and that's basically what Levi would hold. Kama, Vani Oymer, and I, Rabbiochenan, say, Ena Maschuna, that it's not unusual the fact that Shri Khus Yad by both of them, Kereba Lazar, we had Sir Khulba Lazar already, D'Ammar, D'Avedah, Ahasi. This one, and that one, like the implication of this one, the implication of the other one, are basically the same. In other words, both of them were necessary, there's no extra possum. Well, okay, Mai, D'Avedah Ahasi, how do we understand it then, that each one of them would be necessary? Well, Mishum de Igalimefrak because you would otherwise be able to ask. You wanted to say that if it had just said Shayim Rekina, might say, certainly Shayim Rer Saar, who says, Mai Le Shayim Rekina, you could have said back like this. If you tell me that Shri Khus Yad is a Shayim Rekina was responsible for it, well, you can't learn that to something else, because Mai Le Shayim Rekina, you know why it's different than Shayim Rer Saar, Shayim Rer Saar, Shayim Rekina, Mishum touched with me, Kay fell. He has to pay sometimes actually double Biton, that's kind of, if he claims that it was really stolen, turns out it wasn't stolen, he swore falsely, he'd have to pay double. You can't learn to another case where he's only paying one time. Okay, and that would be that approach. Ummandilogpara, and Rabiosi Bartnoharay, who doesn't say that that's a empirical, what would he hold? Well, he would tell you like this true, you'd have to pay double, but you know how many hoops you have to jump through to get the person to pay double. In other words, Karna Bele Shvua Adifa Mi Kfeil Le Bishvua, if you have Karen without a Shvua is, let's actually see this Rashi inside, this is a Gavalta Gaurashi, this is Rashi, first line under the Gomar, Dima Mascal, Karna Bele Shvua, the principle that has to be paid, even if there's no Shvua taken by the person, is actually more makhm where they're having to pay double with a Shvua. Says Rashi, Khaim Rekina Rer Saar, it's actually more makhmir, the Shvuaib Rekina Rer Saar, Shvuaib Bekaren, and he has to pay the principal value of the Edimian question, Anchil inish, but even without him swearing, Le Shekir, Bele makhm, in a place where Shvuaib Rekina would be potter, Dachinu, what do we mean? In the case of Knavaveda, where the thing was stolen or lost, Mi Shvuaib Rekina, now a Shvuaib Rekina might have to pay, but he's Michelleim, Kfeil, however, again, a lot of hoops have to be jumped through for that to go through. Umida Zu'ena Ella, and here's some of the hoops. Number one, La Akashinishpa the Shekir, not only does he have to come to court in the night, he has to formally swear falsely that it was stolen, and number two, Ubao, Eidim Shunigneva, and then witnesses come that it actually was stolen, he swear it wasn't, witnesses came to the show that it was, Dachis, Rabi, Kfeil, Bento, and Tainazganav, that which the guy who claimed it was stolen really, it wasn't, has to pay double. That's only La Akashinishpa, only after he took the Shvua bottom line to pay one time. Without the Shvua, it's actually more Machmir than double with the Shvuaib. Rava, who we had circled, the last circle on the page, Rava Amr, low Taimar, now Rava is coming saying even according to Rava Lazar, you can have this low Taimar, low Taimar, Shvuaib, the truth is, the Torah didn't have to tell us that there's going to be a liability if the person was watching the item, touched and reused it when he shouldn't have, Laubusherbechina, Laubusherbechina, Laubusherbechina, that's not to tell us by either of them. The Tacey, Michail, and I would learn Kavakayemir from Shol, one of the Arbusherbechina, who gets all the benefit, and the owner of the item gets no return. The Abbusherbechina gets the Mitzvah, but the Tacey Michail, Colin. Machail, a typical borrower, dilladass by Limka of it, when he's using the item, that's what a borrower does. He uses the item, just shalak by Yad, and yet, Haif, he would be liable for any oinsim that happened. Then a Shvuaibhina, and the Shvuaibhina, those two, he's watching for free, or watching even for wages like Colshek, that he would certainly be Haif, if something happened. In which case, Lama Namaar, why would you possibly need to say it both by Sharmakayemir, and by Shvuaibhina, when I can learn there's a Kavakayemir from a Shil. Well, Khada, is squiggling on the word Khada here, and squiggling on the word "idah" a line later. Khada, first of all, Laubalah, shikusyad. Excuse me, and shikusyad, shikusyad, does not nikusyad, and the person would be liable for the higher level of viability, even if he didn't appreciate the item at all, the "idah" and the other one teaches me, and I double-unline this word "shillow." Shillow, Tomar, don't say the following, which you might have thought to say, but don't say it, and here's the following, it goes for two lines and two words. Don't say, there's this concept of if you're learning B from A, that normally you say that whatever the limitations of A are, if you're learning B from it, then you have to have limitations on B also. Don't say that over here, don't say "dio," let Bahmin had to end from that, which is to ride from something. Leos can need him to be like that, which is to ride from. Ma shawel, just like shawel, but biling putter. If you're borrowing something, but you're using it along with the owners at the same time, borrowing an animal, and he's working with you, you would be off the hook for that high level of liability. Don't say that so too ashamed of him and ashamed of him, but that's not true, rather ashamed of him or shame of him or shame of him, but biling is quiet. Kama, Ulamandam are according to the other Mandama, this would be Raav, who says shillow's yad, "shillow's yad," then what do you need these two? So come for Hanh in Tarthish shillow's yad. Bama Lee, why do you need one by shillow's yad, why do you need one by shillow's yad, why do you learn it all from shawel? Well, you need a both and here we go, Khada, he's squealing on the word Khada, a line and a few words later is another vidakh. The first one is the same thing that we had said before, shillow's yad, not to say, "dye, Ola, Ola, when is it going to be done?" Da, da, da, da, da, da, da, vidakh, and I'm squealing on the vidakh Khada, Sonia, following Brissa, which goes till the end of the da, vidakh, look at this, Sonia. The Pasuk talks about having to go to court with the judges there and it says vinikra, bala, bayes, Elah, Elahim, to the judges, the guy who was supposed to be watching it, he draws close to the judge. Now we're drawing close to do what and then there's going to be a liability that is talking about le shivua for to take a shvua, which Rashi says about eight lines before the end of the rashi, do we must go to shvua? Vahki, kammar. Imba yimatsa, kimasha, amashan nignavah, let's see if it turns out that it's not like the guy claimed that is stolen. Elahoo, ganva, he stole it. Vuhu kvar, nikra of El ha'dayana, he had already drawn close to the judges. Le shvua, venish, bala shaker. In other words, what does it mean to go close to the judges? He took the shvua and he swore falsely to akhraq bawaidim and then when this is came, asha yarshun, ha'dayana, that's the scenario where when the day on him say to the fellow, you are guilty, you shall okay, for us to pay double. Okay, so let's go back into the brice. The puzzle says, ven nikra of bala bai, it's the one who was watching the item, it was stolen, and then when this is came, it was stolen, and he actually stole himself. Elahoo, kimwetsi, drawing close to the judges for it, has to be in the context of where there was a shvua taken. Kama atai, milish fua, one second. It doesn't say that like mafourush, you're trying to tell me it's that he took a shvua. Oh, and Elahdin, maybe he drew close to the judges for the court case. No, nam, arshikusi ha'damatah, ven nam, arshikusi ha'damala, that's the connection essentially, chusi ha'damatah, by a shaimir sakhar, and it says that lamala, by ven nikra of bala bai, isha lei kim, emo ishaalah, malahala, it's specifically in the context of taking a shvua, afkhan, lish fua, specifically in the context of taking a shvua, which teaches us that the guy who claimed it was stolen, and really it's not true. And when this is coming, say that it is not true, that he himself stole it, then he has to pay a double. But again, it's only after the shvua was taken. And we also learned that he's putter from the name of Aveda with a shvua. Adkhan.