תלמוד על בבא מציעא 5:1

Rebbi Jeremiah asked: There¹²⁰Mishnah 5, which forbids handing over calves to be raised unless the rancher is paid for his work. you say that a paid trustee who would be responsible for accidents is forbidden. But here¹²¹Mishnah 6, which allows such contracts for adult animals without restrictions. you say that a paid trustee who is responsible for accidents is permitted. Does it not happen that an unpaid trustee agrees to be like a borrower^81,An agent is not liable for accidents only if he strictly acts in the principal’s interest. If he is permitted to use the other’s money for his own trades, be becomes liable as a borrower while remaining an agent (Babli 94a).¹²²The quote from Halakhah 5 is slightly out of place here. Since the rancher is supposed to use the animal for his purposes, he cannot be under the rules of the unpaid trustee; he is a paid trustee. But this is really irrelevant for the question; the main point is that the transaction involves an element of risk which shields it from the laws of interest, Note 115.? Rebbi Jeremiah asked: There¹²³Mishnah Bekhorot 2:4, quoted in the Babli 70b. The offspring of a Gentile’s mortmain animals in the hands of a Jewish tenant farmer are not subject to the laws of the firstling since the mothers are considered the Gentile’s property. you say that mortmain belongs to the first, but here you say to the second¹²⁴In the Halakhah here, the offspring is defined as the tenant’s property.. Rebbi Yose said, there since the essence belongs to the first, the offspring are counted for the first¹²⁵Since the owner can repossess the mother if the tenant is in arrears with his payment, the Gentile retains a monetary interest in the mother. This is enough to free the offspring from the rules of firstlings.. But here the essence belongs to the second since the offspring belong to the second¹²⁶As explained in the Halakhah. For the majority opinion in Mishnah Bekhorot 2:4, the offspring’s offspring is subject to the rules of firstlings for the same reason..

Rebbi Jeremiah asked: There¹²⁰Mishnah 5, which forbids handing over calves to be raised unless the rancher is paid for his work. you say that a paid trustee who would be responsible for accidents is forbidden. But here¹²¹Mishnah 6, which allows such contracts for adult animals without restrictions. you say that a paid trustee who is responsible for accidents is permitted. Does it not happen that an unpaid trustee agrees to be like a borrower^81,An agent is not liable for accidents only if he strictly acts in the principal’s interest. If he is permitted to use the other’s money for his own trades, be becomes liable as a borrower while remaining an agent (Babli 94a).¹²²The quote from Halakhah 5 is slightly out of place here. Since the rancher is supposed to use the animal for his purposes, he cannot be under the rules of the unpaid trustee; he is a paid trustee. But this is really irrelevant for the question; the main point is that the transaction involves an element of risk which shields it from the laws of interest, Note 115.? Rebbi Jeremiah asked: There¹²³Mishnah Bekhorot 2:4, quoted in the Babli 70b. The offspring of a Gentile’s mortmain animals in the hands of a Jewish tenant farmer are not subject to the laws of the firstling since the mothers are considered the Gentile’s property. you say that mortmain belongs to the first, but here you say to the second¹²⁴In the Halakhah here, the offspring is defined as the tenant’s property.. Rebbi Yose said, there since the essence belongs to the first, the offspring are counted for the first¹²⁵Since the owner can repossess the mother if the tenant is in arrears with his payment, the Gentile retains a monetary interest in the mother. This is enough to free the offspring from the rules of firstlings.. But here the essence belongs to the second since the offspring belong to the second¹²⁶As explained in the Halakhah. For the majority opinion in Mishnah Bekhorot 2:4, the offspring’s offspring is subject to the rules of firstlings for the same reason..