The Torah in Parashat Mishpatim (Shemot 22:13) addresses the case of a borrower – one who receives an item from its owner to use as a favor, without having to pay for it. Unlike other Shomrim (“watchmen”) who are entrusted with another person’s object, a Sho’el (borrower) bears liability even in a situation of Oness – where the item was lost or damaged due to circumstances beyond his control. The Sefer Ha’hinuch lists as the 60 th Biblical command the obligation upon Bet Din to preside over disputes that arise between an object’s owner and a borrower, and to rule in accordance with the principles of Torah law. Although a Sho’el generally bears liability for anything that happens to the object, an important exception is “Meta Mahamat Melacha” – literally, “it dies as a result of work.” This means that if the borrowed item was damaged as a result of normal activity, then the Sho’el does not bear liability. The classic case of “Meta Mahamat Melacha” is an animal which is borrowed to perform labor, and over the course of the animal’s normal activity, it dies. Since the borrower quite obviously borrowed the animal to use it, and he used it in a normal manner which the owner clearly expected, the borrower does not bear liability. Likewise, if someone borrowed a piece of equipment, and he used it normally, he does not bear liability if the object broke. The rule of “Meta Mahamat Melacha” applies only if the borrower did not deviate from the lender’s specifications. For example, if the lender instructed the borrower not to have the animal ride in a mountainous terrain, and the borrower then defied the lender’s instructions, the borrower bears liability if the animal dies, even if it died over the course of its normal activity. This applies even in the reverse case, if the owner instructed the borrower not to ride the animal in flat terrain, and the borrowed disobeyed. Even though riding on flat terrain is less arduous for the animal, nevertheless, since the borrower deviated from the owner’s instructions, the borrower is liable if the animal died while riding on the flat terrain. When one lends money, then the borrower is expected to repay the loan within thirty days, unless a different arrangement was specified. In the case of lending objects, however, the time-frame depends on the nature of the object. For example, if somebody borrows a suit or outfit for Sheba Berachot, then, quite obviously, it is expected that the borrower needs it for a week, and so the lender cannot demand it back before the end of that week. The Torah makes an interesting exception to the rule of the Sho’el, absolving him of liability in a case of “Be’alav Imo” – if the owner works for the borrower at the time he borrowed the object and the object was lost or damaged. If the object’s owner is “borrowed” by the borrower along with the object, then the borrower is not responsible if something happens to the object. A fascinating application of this rule appears in the Shulhan Aruch (Hoshen Mishpat, 346:13), who discusses the situation of a teacher who teaches a group of students. If the arrangement is such that the students must learn whichever Masechet the teacher chooses, then they are considered “borrowed” by the teacher, in that they are committed to study with him whatever he chooses. (The underlying assumption is that a teacher benefits from having students to teach, as it leads him to carefully review and clarify the material.) Therefore, if one of the students lends something to the teacher during the period when this arrangement is binding, the teacher is not held responsible if something happens to the object. Conversely, if the teacher is committed to teach whatever Masechet the students decide, they the teacher is considered “borrowed” by the students. And thus if he lends something to a student, the student would not be held responsible if something happens to the object.