💼 Mishnah Bava Metzia 6

הַשּׂוֹכֵר אֶת הָאֻמָּנִין, וְהִטְעוּ זֶה אֶת זֶה, אֵין לָהֶם זֶה עַל זֶה אֶלָּא תַרְעֹמֶת. שָׂכַר אֶת הַחַמָּר וְאֶת הַקַּדָּר לְהָבִיא פִרְיָפְרִין וַחֲלִילִים לַכַּלָּה אוֹ לַמֵּת, וּפוֹעֲלִין לְהַעֲלוֹת פִּשְׁתָּנוֹ מִן הַמִּשְׁרָה, וְכָל דָּבָר שֶׁאָבֵד, וְחָזְרוּ בָהֶן, מְקוֹם שֶׁאֵין שָׁם אָדָם, שׂוֹכֵר עֲלֵיהֶן אוֹ מַטְעָן:

With regard to one who hires artisans or laborers, and they deceived one another, they have nothing but a grievance against one another, and they have no financial claim against the deceptive party. If one hired a donkey driver or a potter to bring posts [piryafarin] for a canopy or flutes to play in honor of a bride or the dead, or if he hired laborers to bring up his flax from the retting tub, i.e., the container of water in which flax is placed in the first stage of the manufacture of linen, and likewise any matter that involves financial loss if not performed on time and the laborers reneged, if this occurred in a place where there is no other person to perform the task, he may hire replacements for a large fee at the expense of the first workers, or deceive them to get them to return to work.

הַשּׂוֹכֵר אֶת הָאֻמָּנִין וְחָזְרוּ בָהֶן, יָדָן עַל הַתַּחְתּוֹנָה. אִם בַּעַל הַבַּיִת חוֹזֵר בּוֹ, יָדוֹ עַל הַתַּחְתּוֹנָה. כָּל הַמְשַׁנֶּה, יָדוֹ עַל הַתַּחְתּוֹנָה. ��ְכָל הַחוֹזֵר בּוֹ, יָדוֹ עַל הַתַּחְתּוֹנָה:

The mishna states a related halakha: With regard to one who hires artisans or laborers to perform work and they reneged on the agreement midway through the work, they are at a disadvantage. They must ensure that the employer does not suffer a loss. Conversely, if the employer reneges, he is at a disadvantage. These two rulings are in accordance with the principle that whoever changes the terms accepted by both parties is at a disadvantage, and whoever reneges on an agreement is at a disadvantage.

הַשּׂוֹכֵר אֶת הַחֲמוֹר לְהוֹלִיכָהּ בָּהָר וְהוֹלִיכָהּ בַּבִּקְעָה, בַּבִּקְעָה וְהוֹלִיכָהּ בָּהָר, אֲפִלּוּ זוֹ עֶשֶׂר מִילִין וְזוֹ עֶשֶׂר מִילִין, וָמֵתָה, חַיָּב. הַשּׂוֹכֵר אֶת הַחֲמוֹר וְהִבְרִיקָה, אוֹ שֶׁנַּעֲשֵׂית אַנְגַּרְיָא, אוֹמֵר לוֹ הֲרֵי שֶׁלְּךָ לְפָנֶיךָ. מֵתָה אוֹ נִשְׁבְּרָה, חַיָּב לְהַעֲמִיד לוֹ חֲמוֹר. הַשּׂוֹכֵר אֶת הַחֲמוֹר לְהוֹלִיכָהּ בָּהָר וְהוֹלִיכָהּ בַּבִּקְעָה, אִם הֶחֱלִיקָה, פָּטוּר, וְאִם הוּחַמָּה, חַיָּב. לְהוֹלִיכָהּ בַּבִּקְעָה וְהוֹלִיכָהּ בָּהָר, אִם הֶחֱלִיקָה, חַיָּב, וְאִם הוּחַמָּה, פָּטוּר. אִם מֵחֲמַת הַמַּעֲלָה, חַיָּב:

With regard to one who rents a donkey to lead it on a mountain but he led it in a valley, or one who rents a donkey to lead it in a valley but he led it on a mountain, even if this path is ten mil and that one is also ten mil, and the animal dies, he is liable. With regard to one who rents a donkey and it became ill or was seized for public service [angarya], the owner can say to the renter: That which is yours is before you, and he is not required to reimburse the renter or to supply him with another donkey. If the animal died or its leg broke, the owner is obligated to provide the renter with another donkey. With regard to one who rents a donkey to lead it on a mountain but he led it in a valley, if it slipped and injured itself he is exempt, but if it died of heatstroke he is liable, as it was the walk in the hotter valley that caused its death. With regard to one who rents a donkey to lead it in a valley but he led it on a mountain, if it slipped he is liable, because this was caused by the mountainous terrain, but if it died of heatstroke he is exempt. If it suffered from heatstroke due to the ascent, he is liable.

הַשּׂוֹכֵר אֶת הַפָּרָה לַחֲרשׁ בָּהָר וְחָרַשׁ בַּבִּקְעָה, אִם נִשְׁבַּר הַקַּנְקַן, פָּטוּר. בַּבִּקְעָה וְחָרַשׁ בָּהָר, אִם נִשְׁבַּר הַקַּנְקַן, חַיָּב. לָדוּשׁ בַּקִּטְנִית וְדָשׁ בַּתְּבוּאָה, פָּטוּר, לָדוּשׁ בַּתְּבוּאָה וְדָשׁ בַּקִּטְנִית, חַיָּב, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהַקִּטְנִית מַחֲלָקֶת:

With regard to one who rents a cow and a plow in order to plow on the mountain but he plowed in the valley, if the plowshare, the cutting tool on the bottom part of the plow, breaks, he is exempt, as it was even more likely to break on mountainous terrain. In a case where he rents the cow and a plow to plow in the valley but he plowed on the mountain, if the plowshare breaks he is liable. If he hired the cow to thresh legumes but it threshed grain, and the cow slipped and broke its leg, he is exempt. If he hired it to thresh grain but it threshed legumes he is liable, because legumes are slippery.

הַשּׂוֹכֵר אֶת הַחֲמוֹר לְהָבִיא עָלֶיהָ חִטִּים וְהֵבִיא עָלֶיהָ שְׂעֹרִים, חַיָּב. תְּבוּאָה וְהֵבִיא עָלֶיהָ תֶבֶן, חַיָּב, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהַנֶּפַח קָשֶׁה לַמַּשְּׂאוֹי. לְהָבִיא לֶתֶךְ חִטִּים וְהֵבִיא לֶתֶךְ שְׂעֹרִים, פָּטוּר. וְאִם הוֹסִיף עַל מַשָּׂאוֹ, חַיָּב. וְכַמָּה יוֹסִיף עַל מַשָּׂאוֹ וִיהֵא חַיָּב. סוּמְכוֹס אוֹמֵר מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי מֵאִיר, סְאָה לְגָמָל, שְׁלשָׁה קַבִּין לַחֲמוֹר:

With regard to one who rents a donkey in order to bring wheat on it, to transport it on its back, and he brought upon it an identical weight of barley, which is lighter than wheat, and the donkey was injured, he is liable. Similarly, if he hired it for transporting grain, and he brought straw of the same weight upon it, he is liable, because the extra volume is as difficult for the animal as the load itself. If he rented a donkey in order to bring on it a letekh, i.e., a measurement of volume, of wheat, but he brought a letekh of barley, he is exempt, as he brought the same volume of a lighter substance. And one who adds to a load a greater volume than he stipulated is liable. And how much must he add to the load for him to be liable? Sumakhos says in the name of Rabbi Meir: A se’a on a camel and three kav on a donkey.

כָּל הָאֻמָּנִין, שׁוֹמְרֵי שָׂכָר הֵן. וְכֻלָּן שֶׁאָמְרוּ, טֹל אֶת שֶׁלְּךָ וְהָבֵא מָעוֹת, שׁוֹמֵר חִנָּם. שְׁמֹר לִי וְאֶשְׁמֹר לָךְ, שׁוֹמֵר שָׂכָר. שְׁמֹר לִי, וְאָמַר לוֹ הַנַּח לְפָנָי, שׁוֹמֵר חִנָּם:

All artisans and laborers who take raw materials to their homes are considered paid bailees for those items until they return them to the owner. And with regard to all those who said to the owner: I finished the work, and therefore take what is yours, i.e., this item, and bring money in its stead, from that point on each of them is considered an unpaid bailee. If one person says to another: Safeguard my property for me and I will safeguard your property for you, each of them is a paid bailee, as each receives the services of the other as payment for his safeguarding. If one says: Safeguard for me, and the other says to him: Place it before me, the second individual is an unpaid bailee.

הִלְוָהוּ עַל הַמַּשְׁכּוֹן, שׁוֹמֵר שָׂכָר. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, הִלְוָהוּ מָעוֹת, שׁוֹמֵר חִנָּם. הִלְוָהוּ פֵּרוֹת, שׁוֹמֵר שָׂכָר. אַבָּא שָׁאוּל אוֹמֵר, מֻתָּר אָדָם לְהַשְׂכִּיר מַשְׁכּוֹנוֹ שֶׁל עָנִי לִהְיוֹת פּוֹסֵק עָלָיו וְהוֹלֵךְ, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא כְּמֵשִׁיב אֲבֵדָה:

One who lent to another based on collateral is a paid bailee for the collateral. Rabbi Yehuda says: One who lent another money is an unpaid bailee for the collateral, whereas one who lent another produce is a paid bailee. Abba Shaul says: It is permitted for a person to rent out a poor person’s collateral that was given to him for a loan, so that by setting a rental price for it he will thereby progressively reduce the debt, i.e., the lender will subtract the rental money he receives from the amount owed by the borrower, because this is considered like returning a lost item. The borrower profits from this arrangement, whereas if the lender does not use the collateral in this manner it provides benefit to no one.

הַמַּעֲבִיר חָבִית מִמָּקוֹם לְמָקוֹם וּשְׁבָרָהּ, בֵּין שׁוֹמֵר חִנָּם בֵּין שׁוֹמֵר שָׂכָר, יִשָּׁבַע. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, זֶה וְזֶה יִשָּׁבַע, וְתָמֵהַּ אֲנִי אִם יְכוֹלִין זֶה וָזֶה לִשָּׁבֵעַ:

With regard to one who was transporting a barrel from one place to another and he broke it, whether he was an unpaid bailee or a paid bailee, if he takes an oath that he was not negligent he is exempt from payment. Rabbi Eliezer says: Both this one, an unpaid bailee, and that one, a paid bailee, must take an oath to exempt themselves from payment, but I wonder whether both this one and that one can take an oath. In other words, this is the halakha that I heard from my teachers, but I do not understand their ruling.