Study Bava Metzia folio 41A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
One requires the knowledge of the owner for the item to be considered returned.
The Talmud asks: If the baraita is in accordance with the opinion of R' Yishmael, why did the tanna in the first clause of the Mishnah establish the case specifically where the owner did not designate a specific place for the jug to be stored in the bailee’s house? Even in a case where the owner des
The Talmud answers: The tanna is speaking utilizing the style: It is not necessary. It is not necessary to state the halakha in a case where the owners designated a place for the jug, as after the bailee replaced the jug, that is its place. But even in a case where the owner did not designate a plac
The Talmud asks: Say the latter clause of the Mishnah: If the owners designated a specific place for the jug, and the bailee moved it and it broke, whether it broke while still in his hand or whether it broke after he replaced the jug, if he moved it for his purposes he is liable to pay, and if he m
The Talmud asks: If the baraita is in accordance with the opinion of R' Akiva, why did the tanna in the latter clause of the Mishnah establish the case specifically where the owner designated a particular place for the jug to be stored in the bailee’s house? Even in a case where the owner did not de