Study Bava Metzia folio 34A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
מי יימר דמגנבא, ואם תמצי לומר דמגנבא – מי יימר דמשתכח גנב, ואי משתכח גנב – מי יימר דמשלם, דלמא מודי ומפטר? אמר רבא: נעשה כאומר לו, לכשתגנב ותרצה ותשלמני הרי פרתי קנויה לך מעכשיו.
who could say that the deposit will be stolen? And if you say it will be stolen, who could say that the thief will be found? And even if the thief will be found, who could say that he will pay the double payment? Perhaps he will confess and will be exempted from the double payment. Rava said in response: It is as though the owner said to the bailee at the time that he gave him the deposit: When it will be stolen, and you will wish to refrain from taking an oath, and you will pay me instead, ownership of my cow is hereby transferred to you from this time, and the cow is an entity that already came into the world. Since ownership of the cow is retroactively transferred to the bailee from the time of the deposit, any profits generated by the cow, e.g., the double payment, belong to the bailee.
מתקיף לה רבי זירא: אי הכי, אפילו גיזותיה וולדותיה נמי! אלמה תניא חוץ מגיזותיה וולדותיה? אלא אמר רבי זירא: נעשה כאומר לו, חוץ מגיזותיה וולדותיה.
R' Zeira objects to this: If so, then even the fleece and offspring of the animal that grew while it was in the bailee’s possession should be the property of the bailee. Why, then, is it taught in a baraita that the bailee receives all profits generated by the animal except for its fleece and its offspring? Rather, R' Zeira says that it is as though the owner said to the bailee: My animal is hereby transferred to you from this time except for its fleece and its offspring.
The Talmud asks: If so, why was this halakha stated in the Mishnah without qualification? Does every owner necessarily have that condition in mind? The Talmud answers: Typically, profit that comes from elsewhere, e.g., the double payment from a thief, which is difficult to anticipate, a person is apt to transfer to the bailee. But profit that originates from the body of the animal, which can be anticipated, a person is not apt to transfer to the bailee.