Three basic topics TB Baba Kama 56

Today’s daf TB Baba Kama 55 discusses three basic topics. The first is indirect actions that led to damages (גְרָָמָה). The person is exempt from liability according to human laws but liable according to the laws of Heaven it would be proper for him to pay compensation. A person may rationalize away his responsibility, but his moral responsibility still remains in the eyes of heaven  “Rabbi Yehoshua taught that one who breaches a fence that stood before another’s animal, thereby allowing the animal to escape, is liable according to the laws of Heaven, lest you say: Since the fence is about to collapse even without this person’s intervention, what did he really do? Based on that logic, one might have thought that he should not be liable even according to the laws of Heaven. Therefore, Rabbi Yehoshua teaches us that in such a case he is liable according to the laws of Heaven.” (Sefaia.org translation)

The second topic is shifting responsibility. Sometimes a shepherd is responsible for the sheep entrusted to him and sometimes he is freed from liability. “From the fact that the mishna teaches the case using the expression: He conveyed it to a shepherd, and does not teach it using the less specific expression: He conveyed it to another, conclude from it that what it means by: He conveyed it to a shepherd, is that the shepherd conveyed it to his assistant, as it is the typical manner of a shepherd to convey an animal to his assistant. But if the shepherd conveyed it to another to care for it in his place, the mishna does not rule that the other person enters in his place.” (Sefaria.org translation) The owner of the sheep could claim he didn’t want the original shepherd to subcontract out to another shepherd’s flock. Consequently, the first shepherd remains liable.

The third topic revolves around lost objects. Returning lost objects is a mitzvah (הָשֵׁבַת עֳבֵדָה). If the person can find the owner, he must keep the lost object and becomes a lost guardian. Rabba and Rav Yosef disagree what type of guardian he becomes with the concurrent responsibilities and liabilities. “Rabba said that he is considered to be like an unpaid bailee (שׁוֹמֵר חִנָּם) because what benefit comes to him through safeguarding it? Therefore, he is just like any unpaid bailee. Rav Yosef said that he is considered to be like a paid bailee (שׁוֹמֵר שָׂכָר) on account of the benefit that he is not required to give bread to a poor person while looking after the lost item, since one who is engaged in one mitzva is exempt from performing another. Consequently, since there is some benefit involved in looking after the lost item, he is considered to be like a paid bailee.” (Sefaria.org translation) Rav Yosef wasn’t talking about finding a wallet which requires no work watching it. He was talking about a case of a lost animal that needs feeding and caring.

Rambam poskins according to Rav Yosef in our last case “If an announcement or notification was made and the owner did not come to claim the discovered object, it should remain in the possession of the finder until Elijah the prophet comes.

“If it is lost or stolen while it is in the finder's possession, he is responsible for it. If it is destroyed by forces beyond his control, he is not liable. The rationale is that a person who cares for a lost object is considered a paid watchman. For he is involved in the performance of a mitzvah, and as such is freed from the obligation to perform several positive commandments as long as he is occupied with guarding it.”  (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Robbery and Lost Objects, chapter 13 halakha 10)