1)

(a)In a case where the bucket that a Sho'el had borrowed broke, Rav Papa ruled - that if he brought witnesses that he had not missed it, he would be exempt from having to pay.

(b)Rav Ashi did not know what to say in a case where mice ganged up against a borrowed cat and killed it. The borrower might be Patur - because of 'Meisah Machmas Melachah'.

(c)Rav Mordechai cited Avimi from Hagrunya, who compared ...

1. ... the case - to a man who was overcome and killed by a gang of women.

2. ... the case, in the second Lashon, where the cat died from eating too many mice - to a man who died from excessive intimacy.

(d)In practical terms - he exempted the Sho'el from paying. because of Meisah Machmas Melachah.

2)

(a)Rava advises ...

1. ... an astute borrower who wishes to exempt himself from liability - to ask the lender to bring him a glass of water as he acquires the article he is borrowing.

2. ... an equally astute lender who wishes to ensure that the borrower remains liable - to postpone the favor until after the Kinyan has been safely effected.

(b)Rava issued a statement about a children's Rebbe, a Shasla, a butcher, an Umna and a barber (or a Sofer). The definition of ...

1. ... 'A Shasla' is someone who plants vineyards in return for half the benefits.

2. ... 'An Umna' is a bloodletter.

(c)All of these, says Rava - are considered She'eilah b'Ba'alim should anyone borrow anything from them at a time during the hours that they are normally busy with their work (see Ritva).

3)

(a)When the Rabanan of Rava's Beis-Ha'Midrash told Rava that he was 'lent to them', they meant - that seeing as he was Meshubad to teach them Torah at all times, whenever they borrowed from him it would always be a case of She'eilah b'Ba'alim.

(b)Rava reacted to this - with annoyance.

(c)And he responded - by pointing out to them that in fact, it was they who were obligated to learn whichever Masechta he chose, and who were therefore Meshubad to him, and not vice-versa.

(d)We rule like Rava for the majority of the year, but not in Iyar and Elul during the Yarchei Kalah Derashos, when Rava had to Darshen the Halachos that were relevant that time of year.

4)

(a)The mule that Mereimar bar Chanina rented to the bei Chuza'i - died as a result of their negligence.

(b)Rava was embarrassed after pronouncing them liable to pay - because Mereimar bar Chanina had helped them to load the animal, in which case it was She'eilah b'Ba'alim, and he ought to have exempted them from paying.

(c)He subsequently discovered however - that Mereimar's intentions had been to ensure that they do not overload his mule (in which case he was working for himself and not for the bei Chuza'i, in which case it was no longer a case of She'eilah b'Ba'alim).

(d)To accommodate those who hold 'Peshi'ah b'Ba'alim Chayav', we amend the case - to where it was not due to their carelessness that the mule had died, but after it was stolen and died naturally in the house of the Ganav (and it was a question of Geneivah b'Ba'alim).

5)

(a)In a case where someone borrows a cow for half a day and rents it for the other half, and it dies, if the owner claims that it died during the period that it was borrowed, and the Shomer claims that he doesn't know - our Mishnah obligates the Shomer to pay ...

(b)... based on the principle - 'Bari ve'Shema, Bari Adif' (Where the claimant is certain and the defendant does not know, we give the benefit of the doubt to the claimant).

(c)The same will apply if he borrowed the cow for one day and hired it for another, and the owner claims that it died on the day that it was borrowed ... . The third case in the Mishnah is - if the Shomer borrowed one cow and hired another, and the owner claims that the borrowed cow died ... .

(d)The Tana rules that, in a case where ...

1. ... the owner claims that the borrowed cow died, and the Shomer counters that it was the cow hired cow that died - the Shomer is Chayav a Shevu'ah and is Patur from paying.

2. ... neither knows which one died - 'Yachloku' (they share the losses) ...

(e)... because he holds 'Mamon ha'Mutal be'Safek Cholkin'.

6)

(a)In a case where Reuven claims a Manah from Shimon, and Shimon replies that he doesn't know, Rav Huna and Rav Yehudah obligate him to pay, conforming with the first set of cases of our Mishnah. Rav Nachman and Rebbi Yochanan rule - that he is exempt from paying.

(b)Rav Huna and Rav Yehudah's ruling is based on the principle 'Bari ve'Shema, Bari Adif (as we explained earlier), Rav Nachman and Rebbi Yochanan's on - 'ha'Motzi me'Chaveiro Alav ha'Re'ayah' (One cannot extract money from someone's domain without a clear proof that the money belongs to him).

(c)To reconcile the latter pair with out Mishnah, we cite another ruling of Rav Nachman, who rules in a case where Reuven claimed a Manah from Shimon, that Shimon is Chayav to pay - when there was an 'Eisek Shevu'ah' between them, meaning that Reuven claimed a Manah from Shimon, and Shimon admitted to half the claim, and did not know about the other half. This obligates him to swear, and since he cannot swear, he has to pay. And our Mishnah speaks under similar circumstances, as we shall now see.

(d)'Eisek Shevu'ah' is based on the principle 'Mitoch she'Eini Yachol Lishava, Meshalem' (someone who is obligated to swear but is unable to do so, must pay).