Today’s daf is sponsored by Debbie Pine and Mark Orenshein in loving memory of Mark’s mother, Sandy Orenshein, Zlata Rochel bat Dovid v’Malka on her 5th yahrzeit.
Rava and Raba bar Meri derive from the Torah one more expression that people use. Other rabbis derive other similar-type statements from the Torah. Why is there a distinction in the Mishna between a case where one exempts another for inflicting bodily damage to a case where one exempts another for destroying one’s possessions? The Mishna rules that if one asks another to break something of theirs, the one who breaks it is liable to pay for it. This contradicts a braita regarding shomrim which says that if one gives one an item to break, the one who breaks it is not responsible. Two resolutions are suggested. One who is in charge of charity funds is not responsible if something happens to the money. Why? There is, however, an exception to this rule. The ninth chapter begins with a discussion of a thief and the thief’s ultimate ownership over the stolen item if the thief changes the item or it changes on its own. What constitutes such a shinui (change) and what doesn’t? Various mishnayot and braitot are brought which seem to contradict the Mishna and each other and various possibilities are brought to reconcile them.
