Study Bava Metzia folio 96A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
By contrast, Rava holds in accordance with the opinion of R' Yonatan, and he explains the verses in accordance with the opinion of R' Yonatan, thereby arriving at the conclusion of the baraita, as it is taught in a baraita: “If its owner is with him, he does not pay” teaches about the case in which
The Talmud raises an objection: But it is also written: “If its owner is not with him, he shall pay.” The verse teaches about the case in which the owner was not working for the borrower at either point in time, and it also teaches about the case in which he was working for him at one of those time
To reconcile the verses, one must say that the phrase “if its owner is with him” serves to tell you that if the owner was with the borrower, i.e., working for him, at the time of borrowing, then he does not need to be with him at the time when the animal is injured or dies for the exemption from li
The Talmud raises a difficulty: I could reverse the conclusion and say that the borrower’s exemption from liability is dependent upon the time when the animal was injured or died. The Talmud explains: It is reasonable that the exemption from liability should be dependent on the time of the borrowing
The Talmud retorts: On the contrary, the time when the animal is injured or dies is of greater significance, because that point marks when the borrower is actually liable to pay for any accidents that occurred.