## Bava Metzia Daf 43b

###### Bava Metzia 43b:1
[Bava Metzia 43b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/43b:1)

אֶלָּא פְּשִׁיטָא כִּשְׁעַת הוֹצָאָה מִבֵּית בְּעָלִים. לֵימָא רַבָּה דְּאָמַר כְּבֵית שַׁמַּאי?! אָמַר לָךְ רַבָּה: בְּיָתֵר כּוּלֵּי עָלְמָא לָא פְלִיגִי, כִּי פְּלִיגִי בְּחָסֵר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** it is **obvious** that Beit Hillel hold that the bailee pays **in accordance with** its value at **the time of** its **removal from the owner’s house,** i.e., at the time of the misappropriation. The Gemara asks: If so, **shall we say that Rabba stated** his opinion **in accordance with** the opinion of **Beit Shammai** and not the opinion of Beit Hillel? The Gemara rejects this: **Rabba** could have **said to you: With regard to** a subsequent **increase** in the value of the misappropriated deposit, **everyone,** Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel, **agrees** that the bailee pays in accordance with its value when the deposit was destroyed. **When they disagree,** it is **in** the case of a subsequent **decrease** in the value of the misappropriated deposit.


###### Bava Metzia 43b:2
[Bava Metzia 43b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/43b:2)

בֵּית שַׁמַּאי סָבְרִי: שְׁלִיחוּת יָד אֵינָהּ צְרִיכָה חֶסְרוֹן – וְכִי חָסַר בִּרְשׁוּתָא דִידֵיהּ חָסַר. וּבֵית הִלֵּל סָבְרִי: שְׁלִיחוּת יָד צְרִיכָה חֶסְרוֹן – וְכִי חָסַר בִּרְשׁוּתָא דְּמָרֵיהּ חָסַר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabba clarifies: Beit Shammai hold** that **misappropriation does not require loss,** and even if the deposit remains intact, his legal status is that of a robber from the moment of misappropriation. **And** therefore, **when** the value of the misappropriated deposit **decreases, it decreases in his possession.** Therefore, he pays in accordance with its value at the time of misappropriation. **And Beit Hillel hold** that **misappropriation requires loss,** and only when the deposit decreases in value after the misappropriation is the bailee liable to pay. **And** therefore, **when** the value of the misappropriated deposit **decreases, it decreases in the possession of its owner.** Therefore, he pays in accordance with its value at the time that it was damaged.


###### Bava Metzia 43b:3
[Bava Metzia 43b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/43b:3)

אֶלָּא הָא דְּאָמַר רָבָא שְׁלִיחוּת יָד אֵינָהּ צְרִיכָה חֶסְרוֹן, לֵימָא רָבָא דְּאָמַר כְּבֵית שַׁמַּאי?! אֶלָּא, הָכָא בְּמַאי עָסְקִינַן? כְּגוֹן שֶׁטִּלְטְלָהּ לְהָבִיא עָלֶיהָ גּוֹזָלוֹת, וּבְשׁוֹאֵל שֶׁלֹּא מִדַּעַת קָא מִיפַּלְגִי;

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But** according to that explanation, concerning **this** *halakha* **that Rava says: Misappropriation does not require loss, shall we say** that the opinion **that Rava stated is in accordance with** the opinion of **Beit Shammai? Rather, with what are we dealing here?** It is with a case **where** the bailee **moved** the barrel **to** stand **upon it** and **bring fledglings** from a nest in a tree. **And they disagree with regard to one who borrows** an item **without the knowledge** of the owner.


###### Bava Metzia 43b:4
[Bava Metzia 43b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/43b:4)

בֵּית שַׁמַּאי סָבְרִי: שׁוֹאֵל שֶׁלֹּא מִדַּעַת – גַּזְלָן הָוֵי, וְכִי חָסַר – בִּרְשׁוּתָא דִּידֵיהּ חָסַר. וּבֵית הִלֵּל סָבְרִי: שׁוֹאֵל שֶׁלֹּא מִדַּעַת – שׁוֹאֵל הָוֵי, וְכִי חָסַר – בִּרְשׁוּתָא דְּמָרֵהּ חָסַר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Beit Shammai hold:** The legal status of **one who borrows** an item **without the knowledge** of the owner **is** that of **a robber** in terms of responsibility. He is accorded that legal status the moment he moves the barrel. **And** therefore, **when** the value of the misappropriated deposit **decreases, it decreases in his possession.** Consequently, he pays in accordance with its value at the time that he borrowed the barrel. **And Beit Hillel hold:** The legal status of **one who borrows without the knowledge** of the owners **is** that of **a borrower,** and only when the barrel is broken is the bailee rendered liable to pay. **And** therefore, **when** the value of the barrel **decreases, it decreases in the possession of its owner.** Consequently, he pays in accordance with the barrel’s value at the time that it was damaged.


###### Bava Metzia 43b:5
[Bava Metzia 43b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/43b:5)

אֶלָּא הָא דְּאָמַר רָבָא: שׁוֹאֵל שֶׁלֹּא מִדַּעַת – לְרַבָּנַן גַּזְלָן הָוֵי, לֵימָא רָבָא דְּאָמַר כְּבֵית שַׁמַּאי?! אֶלָּא הָכָא בְּשֶׁבַח (שֶׁל) גְּזֵילָה קָמִיפַּלְגִי. בֵּית שַׁמַּאי סָבְרִי: שֶׁבַח גְּזֵילָה דְּנִגְזָל הָוֵי, וּבֵית הִלֵּל סָבְרִי: שֶׁבַח גְּזֵילָה דְּגַזְלָן הָוֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But** according to that explanation, concerning **this** *halakha* **that Rava says:** The legal status of **one who borrows** an item **without the knowledge** of the owner, **according to** the opinion of **the Rabbis, is** that of **a robber** in terms of responsibility, **shall we say** that the opinion **that Rava stated is in accordance with** the opinion of **Beit Shammai? Rather,** contrary to the previous explanations, the terms decrease and increase are not referring to changes in market value. They are referring to the decrease in the value of the animal when its wool is sheared and the increase in its value due to the birth of offspring. And **here,** it is **with regard to** the **enhancement of stolen** property that **they disagree. Beit Shammai hold:** The enhancement **of stolen** property belongs to the one **who was robbed. And Beit Hillel hold:** The **enhancement of stolen** property belongs to **the robber.**


###### Bava Metzia 43b:6
[Bava Metzia 43b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/43b:6)

וּבִפְלוּגְתָּא דְּהָנֵי תַּנָּאֵי, דְּתַנְיָא: הַגּוֹזֵל אֶת הָרָחֵל, גְּזָזָהּ וְיָלְדָה מְשַׁלֵּם אוֹתָהּ וְאֶת גִּיזּוֹתֶיהָ וְאֶת וַלְדוֹתֶיהָ, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: גְּזֵילָה חוֹזֶרֶת בְּעֵינֶיהָ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** it is **with regard to** the issue that is the subject of **the dispute between these *tanna’im*** that they disagree, **as it is taught** in a *baraita*: With regard to **one who robs** another of **a ewe,** if **he sheared it or** if it **gave birth,** the robber **pays** the owner for **it and** for **its fleece or** for **its offspring;** this is **the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda says: The stolen** property **returns** to the owner **in its** current **state.**


###### Bava Metzia 43b:7
[Bava Metzia 43b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/43b:7)

דַּיְקָא נָמֵי, דְּקָתָנֵי: בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים יִלְקֶה בְּחָסֵר וּבְיָתֵר, וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים: כִּשְׁעַת הוֹצָאָה. שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara comments: The language of the mishna **is also precise, as it is taught** that **Beit Shammai say: He is penalized for** its **decrease and** its **increase. And Beit Hillel say:** He pays **in accordance with the time of removal.** When recording the opinion of Beit Shammai, the mishna does not state: He is penalized for its rise and fall in value. The Gemara affirms: **Learn from** the wording of the mishna that they disagree with regard to fleece and offspring.


###### Bava Metzia 43b:8
[Bava Metzia 43b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/43b:8)

רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר כִּשְׁעַת הַתְּבִיעָה. אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא. וּמוֹדֶה רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא בִּמְקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ עֵדִים. מַאי טַעְמָא – דְּאָמַר קְרָא ״לַאֲשֶׁר הוּא לוֹ יִתְּנֶנּוּ בְּיוֹם אַשְׁמָתוֹ״, וְכֵיוָן דְּאִיכָּא עֵדִים, מֵהָהוּא שַׁעְתָּא – הוּא דְּאִיחַיַּיב לֵיהּ אַשְׁמָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches that **Rabbi Akiva says:** He pays **in accordance with** its value at **the time of the claim. Rav Yehuda says** that **Shmuel says:** The ***halakha*** is **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Akiva. And Rabbi Akiva concedes** in a case **where there are witnesses** to the misappropriation, as in that case the payment is calculated in accordance with the value of the deposit at the time of the misappropriation. **What is the reason** for that *halakha*? It is **as the verse states** concerning, among others, one who misappropriated a deposit: **“To whom it appertains shall he give it on the day of his being guilty”** (Leviticus 5:24). **And** in this case, **since there are witnesses** to the robbery, **from that moment he is liable to** pay **him** for his **guilt.** He is rendered guilty at the moment the witnesses saw him misappropriate the deposit.


###### Bava Metzia 43b:9
[Bava Metzia 43b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/43b:9)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב אוֹשַׁעְיָא לְרַב יְהוּדָה: רַבִּי, אַתָּה אוֹמֵר כֵּן? הָכִי אָמַר רַבִּי אַסִּי אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: חָלוּק הָיָה רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אֲפִילּוּ בִּמְקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ עֵדִים, מַאי טַעְמָא? דְּאָמַר קְרָא ״לַאֲשֶׁר הוּא לוֹ יִתְּנֶנּוּ בְּיוֹם אַשְׁמָתוֹ״, וּבֵי דִינָא הוּא דְּקָא מְחַיְּיבִי לֵיהּ אַשְׁמָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Oshaya said to Rav Yehuda: My teacher,** is **that** what **you say? This** is what **Rabbi Asi says** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan says: Rabbi Akiva was in disagreement even** in a case **where there are witnesses** to the misappropriation. **What is the reason** for that *halakha*? It is **as the verse states: “To whom it appertains shall he give it on the day of his being guilty,” and** it is **the court,** not the witnesses, **that renders him liable to** pay **him** for his **guilt.**


###### Bava Metzia 43b:10
[Bava Metzia 43b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/43b:10)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַבִּי זֵירָא לְרַבִּי אַבָּא בַּר פָּפָּא: כִּי אָזְלַתְּ לְהָתָם, אַקֵּיף אַסּוּלָּמָא דְצוֹר, וְעוּל לְגַבֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אִידִי, וּבְעִי מִינֵּיהּ אִי שְׁמִיעָא לֵיהּ לְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹ אֵין הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: הָכִי אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא לְעוֹלָם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Zeira said to Rabbi Abba bar Pappa: When you go there,** to Eretz Yisrael, **take a circuitous** route **to the Ladder of Tyre, and enter before Rabbi Ya’akov bar Idi, and ask of him if he heard** whether according **to Rabbi Yoḥanan** the ***halakha*** is **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Akiva or** whether the ***halakha*** is **not in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Akiva.** He went and asked. Rabbi Ya’akov bar Idi **said to him: This** is what **Rabbi Yoḥanan says:** The ***halakha*** is **always in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Akiva.**


###### Bava Metzia 43b:11
[Bava Metzia 43b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/43b:11)

מַאי לְעוֹלָם? אָמַר רַב אָשֵׁי: שֶׁלֹּא תֹּאמַר הָנֵי מִילֵּי הֵיכָא דְּלֵיכָּא עֵדִים, אֲבָל הֵיכָא דְּאִיכָּא עֵדִים לָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What is** the meaning of **always? Rav Ashi said:** Rabbi Yoḥanan used this term so **that you will not say** the following: **This statement,** that the *halakha* is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva, **applies** specifically in a case **where there are no witnesses, but** in a case **where there are witnesses, no,** payment is calculated in accordance with the value of the deposit when they witnessed the misappropriation.


###### Bava Metzia 43b:12
[Bava Metzia 43b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/43b:12)

וְאִי נָמֵי דְּאַהְדְּרַהּ לְדוּכְתַּהּ וְאִיתְּבַרָא לְאַפּוֹקֵי מִדְּרַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל, דְּאָמַר: לָא בָּעֵינַן דַּעַת בְּעָלִים, קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן דְּבָעֵינַן דַּעַת בְּעָלִים. וְרָבָא אָמַר: הֲלָכָה כְּבֵית הִלֵּל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Or alternatively,** the *halakha* will not be in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva in a case **where he returns** the barrel **to its place and it broke.** Rabbi Yoḥanan stated that the *halakha* is always in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva, **to exclude** the opinion of **Rabbi Yishmael, who says** that if one stole from another and returned it **we do not require the knowledge of the owners** for the item to be considered returned. Rabbi Yoḥanan **teaches us** that the *halakha* is **that we require the knowledge of the owners,** in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva (see 40b). **And Rava says:** Contrary to the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan, the ***halakha*** is **in accordance with** the opinion of **Beit Hillel.**


###### Bava Metzia 43b:13
[Bava Metzia 43b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/43b:13)

**מַתְנִי׳** הַחוֹשֵׁב לִשְׁלוֹחַ יָד בְּפִקָּדוֹן, בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים: חַיָּיב, וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים: אֵינוֹ חַיָּיב עַד שֶׁיִּשְׁלַח בּוֹ יָד, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״אִם לֹא שָׁלַח יָדוֹ בִּמְלֶאכֶת רֵעֵהוּ״. הִטָּה אֶת הֶחָבִית וְנָטַל הֵימֶנָּה רְבִיעִית וְנִשְׁבְּרָה – אֵינוֹ מְשַׁלֵּם אֶלָּא רְבִיעִית. הִגְבִּיהָהּ וְנָטַל הֵימֶנָּה רְבִיעִית וְנִשְׁבְּרָה – מְשַׁלֵּם דְּמֵי כוּלָּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** With regard to **one who intends to misappropriate a deposit** and voices that intent in the presence of witnesses, **Beit Shammai say:** He is **liable** to pay for any damage to the deposit from that point forward, **and Beit Hillel say:** He is **liable** to pay **only** if **he** actually **misappropriates** the deposit, **as it is stated** concerning a bailee: **“Whether he has misappropriated his neighbor’s goods”** (Exodus 22:7). If **he tilted the** deposited **barrel and took from it a quarter**-*log* of wine for his own use, **and** the barrel **broke,** then **he pays only** for that **quarter**-*log***.** If **he lifted** the barrel **and took from it a quarter**-*log* of wine, **and** the barrel **broke,** since he acquired the barrel by lifting it, **he pays the value of** the **entire** barrel.