Talmud Leat Bava Kamma Review Looked for prooftexts
Talmud Le’at Bava Kamma
Review • Looked for prooftexts of Foot and Tooth • Gemara teased out several distinctions between the two • Foot is unique because it is commonplace • Tooth is unique because the animal benefits • Secondaries of Foot and Tooth are the same as Primaries (Rav Papa) • Definition of "Hiddush" • Completed our first daf! Talmud Le'at - 05 2
Damagers Pit Ox Horn Tooth Maveh Fire Foot Primary Secondary Pushing Rubbing Biting Spoiling Fruit Crouching Walking Hair Bridle Bit Kicking Talmud Le'at - 05 Bell 3
Exodus 21: 33 -34 - Pit יכסנו ולא בר איש כי־יכרה או בור איש וכי־יפתח חמור׃ או שור ונפל־שמה יהיה־לו והמת לבעליו ישיב כסף ישלם הבור בעל And if a man shall open a Pit or if a man shall dig a Pit and not cover it, and an ox or an ass fall therein, the owner of the Pit shall make it good; he shall give money to its owner and the dead beast shall be his. Talmud Le'at 05 4
Bava Kamma 3 a ? ניהו מאי דבור תולדה ' ט ותולדה ' י אב אילימא כתיבי ' י ולא כתיבי ' ט לא What is the secondary of the Pit? If you said that the primary is ten and its secondary is nine, neither nine is written nor ten is written! Talmud Le'at - 05 5
Talmudic Terminology Handbreadth – Tefach - טפח 3 -4 inches Talmud Le'at - 05 6
Bava Kamma 3 a " לו יהיה "והמת : קשיא לא הא : לרבנן להו וקים רחמנא אמר ; מיתה עבדן ' י עבדי לא מיתה , עבדי נזיקין ' ט This is not a difficulty: "And the dead animal shall be his" (Exodus 21: 34) the Merciful One said and the Rabbis had a tradition: ten could kill; nine would injure but not kill. Talmud Le'at - 05 7
Bava Kamma 3 a לנזקין אב וזה למיתה אב זה סוף Ultimately, this is a primary of death, and that is a primary of injury. Talmud Le'at - 05 8
Bava Kamma 3 a ברשות שהניחן ומשאו סכינו אאבנו אלא והזיקו הרבים Rather, his stone, his knife or his load which were placed in the public domain and caused damage Talmud Le'at - 05 9
Talmudic Terminology Reshut Ha. Rabim - הרבים רשות Public Domain One of four defined domains • Street at least 24 feet wide • Place where 600, 000 people pass by Talmud Le'at - 05 10
Bava Kamma 3 a ? דמי היכי בור היינו לשמואל ובין לרב בין דאפקרינהו אי What is this case? If they were abandoned there, according to both Rav and Shmuel, they are the same as the Pit. Talmud Le'at - 05 11
Talmudic Terminology HEFKER - הפקר ownerless property and renunciation of ownership Talmud Le'at - 05 12
Bava Kamma 3 b : אפקרינהו דלא ואי בור היינו למדנו מבורו כולם דאמר לשמואל אי שור היינו למדנו משורו כולם דאמר לרב ואי If he did not abandon them, according to Shmuel, who says they are all derived from the Pit, they are equivalent to the Pit; according to Rav, who says they are all derived from the Ox, they are equivalent to the Ox. Talmud Le'at - 05 13
Rav & Shmuel 1 st Generation Amoraim in Babylonia – 230 CE 1) When Rav and Shmuel debate, the Halacha follows Rav in ritual law (Issur ve. Hetter) and Shmuel in monetary matters (Dinei Mammonot). 2) According to the Rosh, this is true only if the majority of Amoraim don't side with either Rav or Shmuel, in which case, we would just follow the majority, while Tosafot believe it to be true in any case 3) If Shmuel himself elucidates the Mishnah according to Rav's position in a case of monetary matters, then the Halacha follows Rav even in that case. 4) If a later Amora elucidates Shmuel's opinion in a matter of Issur ve. Hetter, the Rif takes it to mean we pasken like Shmuel, while the Rosh argues that there's no proof. It's normal for later Amoraim to elucidate the words of earlier ones, so it's not a test for whose position is accepted. Talmud Le'at - 05 14
Bava Kamma 3 b ? בור שנא מאי עליך ושמירתו וממונך לנזק עשייתו תחלת שכן עליך ושמירתן וממונך לנזק עשייתן תחלת נמי הני Why is Pit different? Just as its initial formation is a source of injury, and it is in your possession, and under your control, These too, its initial formation is a source of injury, and it is in your possession, and under your control! Talmud Le'at - 05 15
Bava Kamma 3 b ; כבור דבור תולדה אלא דמבעה אתולדה פפא רב קאמר וכי Rather the secondary of the Pit is equal to the Pit, and when R. Papa made his statement, it was in reference to the "maveh. " Talmud Le'at - 05 16
Bava Kamma 3 b ? ניהו מאי . כשן דשן תולדה אוקימנא הא , שן זו מבעה דאמר לשמואל אי ? ביה אית תולדות ומאי אבות מאי , אדם זה מבעה דאמר לרב אי What is it? If we follow Shmuel, who said "maveh" is the Tooth, we have established that the secondary of the Tooth equals the Tooth; If we follow Rav, who said that the maveh refers to human beings, what primaries and what secondaries could there be in it? Talmud Le'at - 05 17
Bava Kamma 3 b אדם והתנן ישן תולדה ניעור אב תימא וכי ישן בין ער בין לעולם מועד And if you would say that the primary is awake, the secondary asleep, have we not learned: A person is always an attested danger (mu'ad), whether awake or asleep? Talmud Le'at - 05 18
Bava Kamma 3 b וניעו אכיחו אלא ? דמי היכי הוה כחו קמזקי דאזלי בהדי אי בור היינו לשמואל בין לרב בין דנייח בתר אי Rather, his mucus or spit. What is the case? If it did damage while the person was in motion, this comes from his own power. If came after it was at rest, whether Rav and Shmuel, it is Pit. Talmud Le'at - 05 19
Bava Kamma 3 b כמבעה דמבעה תולדה אלא דאש אתולדה פפא רב קאמר וכי Rather the secondary of the "maveh" is equivalent to the maveh and when R. Papa made his statement, it was about the secondary of Fire. Talmud Le'at - 05 20
Bava Kamma 3 b ? ניהו מאי דאש תולדה ברוח ונפלו גגו בראש שהניחן ומשאו סכינו אבנו אילימא ? דמי היכי , והזיקו מצויה . אש היינו מזקי קא דאזלו בהדי אי What is the secondary of Fire? If I say it is a stone, a knife and or a load which he placed on top of his roof and fell down by a normal wind and did damage, then in what circumstances? If they did damage while in motion, they are equivalent to Fire Talmud Le'at - 05 21
Bava Kamma 3 b ? אש מ"ש , עליך ושמירתו וממונך בהן מעורב אחר דכח עליך ושמירתן וממונך בהן מעורב אחר כח נמי הני Why is Fire different? Just as Fire is aided by an external force, and is in your possession and is under your control, these are aided by an external force, and are your possession, and are under your control. Talmud Le'at - 05 22
Bava Kamma 3 b ; כאש דאש תולדה אלא דרגל אתולדה פפא רב קאמר וכי Rather, the secondary of Fire is equal to Fire; and when R. Papa made his statement, he was referring to the secondary of Foot. Talmud Le'at - 05 23
Bava Kamma 3 b ? כרגל דרגל תולדה אוקימנא הא ! רגל לה גמירי דהלכתא , צרורות נזק בחצי "Foot"! Did we not establish that the secondary of the foot is equal to the foot? Payment of half damages by pebbles, this is a halacha by learned tradition Talmud Le'at - 05 24
Bava Kamma 3 b ? דרגל תולדה לה קרי ואמאי העלייה מן לשלם And why do we call this a secondary of the foot? To pay from the best of property. Talmud Le'at - 05 25
Bava Kamma 3 b ? רבא בעי מבעיא והא או משלם מגופו צרורות נזק חצי רבא דבעי ? משלם העלייה מן But did not Rava raise a dilemma? Rava raised a dilemma: half-damage of pebbles from the body is paid or from the best of the property? Talmud Le'at - 05 26
Bava Kamma 3 b ; ליה מבעיא לרבא ליה פשיטא פפא לרב To Rava this was a dilemma; to R. Papa it was obvious Talmud Le'at - 05 27
Bava Kamma 3 b תולדה לה קרי אמאי , ליה דמבעיא לרבא ? דרגל ברה"ר לפוטרה To Rava, who raised a dilemma, how is it called a secondary of the Foot? To exempt in the public domain. Talmud Le'at - 05 28
- Slides: 28