(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


Prepared by Rabbi P. Feldman
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld

Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

Bava Kama 27

BAVA KAMA 27 (4 Elul) - dedicated l'Iluy Nishmas Chaim Yissachar (ben Yaakov) Smulewitz of Cleveland on his Yahrzeit, by his daughter and son in law, Jeri & Eli Turkel of Raanana, Israel.


(a) (Rabah): Reuven threw a vessel off the roof; Shimon broke it in mid-air with a stick - Shimon is exempt, for it was already (standing to be) broken.
(b) (Rabah): Reuven threw Levi's vessel off the roof; there were pillows on the ground.. Shimon removed the pillows, or even if Reuven removed them, he is exempt.
(c) Question: Why is this?
(d) Answer: When he threw it, it was not standing to break - therefore, he is not liable for throwing it. (Removing the pillows is causation, which is exempt.)
(e) (Rabah): Reuven threw a baby off the roof; Shimon killed him in mid-air with a sword - R. Yehudah ben Beseira and Chachamim argue on this.
1. (Beraisa): 10 men hit Reuven, each with a different stick, and he died - whether this was at the same time or one after the other, they are exempt;
2. R. Yehudah ben Beseira says, if they hit him one after the other, the last one is liable, for he made him die sooner.
(f) If the baby landed on the horns of an ox and died - R. Yishmael (son of R. Yochanan ben Brokah) and Chachamim will argue whether the owner pays Kofer.
1. (Beraisa): "He will give redemption of his soul" - the value of the victim (here, since the baby was standing to die, he has no value, there is no Kofer);
2. R. Yishmael says, the value of the owner of the ox (so he pays Kofer).
(g) (Rabah): A man fell off a roof (in a normal wind) and landed on a woman. He pays 4 damages; if she was his Yevamah (and he fell in the place of relations), he does not acquire her.
1. He pays Nezek, pain, medical expenses and temporary unemployment, but not embarrassment.
i. (Mishnah): One only pays for embarrassment if he intended to damage.
(h) (Rabah): A man fell off a roof in an abnormal wind and damaged. He pays Nezek, but not the 4 damages; in a normal wind, he pays 4 damages, but is exempt for embarrassment;
1. If he moved to land on the person to cushion his fall, he is liable even for embarrassment.
2. (Beraisa): "She will stick out her hand" - obviously, to grab! It also says "And grabbed" to teach that intention to damage obligates payment for embarrassment, even without intention to embarrass.
(a) (Rabah): Reuven put a coal on Shimon's heart; Shimon died from it - Reuven is exempt (because Shimon should have removed it).
1. If he put it on Shimon's clothing and they were burned, Reuven is liable.
(b) Rava: Both of these are learned from Mishnayos.
1. (Mishnah): Reuven held Shimon in a fire or in water so that Shimon could not escape - Reuven is liable;
i. If he pushed him in, and Shimon could have escaped - Reuven is exempt.
2. (Mishnah): Reuven told Shimon: 'Tear my garment, break my jug', and Shimon did so - he is liable;
i. 'On condition that you will be exempt' - he is exempt.
(c) Question #1 (Rabah): Reuven put a coal on the heart of Shimon's slave; the slave died - is this as putting the coal on Shimon, or as on Shimon's money?
1. Question #2 (Rabah): If this is as putting the coal on Shimon - what if he puts it on Shimon's ox?
(d) Answer (Rabah): The slave is as Shimon (for he knows to remove it), the ox is as his money (it lacks understanding).
***** PEREK HA'MENI'ACH *****


(a) (Mishnah): Reuven left his jug in a public domain; Shimon came and tripped on it, and it broke - Shimon is exempt from paying for it.
1. If Shimon was hurt by it, the owner of the barrel (Reuven) must pay the damage.
(b) (Gemara) Question #1: Why does it first call it a jug, and then call it a barrel?
(c) Question #2: Another Mishnah says, if Levi is walking with a barrel, and Yehudah with a beam, and the jug broke when it hit the beam, Yehudah is exempt.
1. There it calls it a barrel, and then a jug!
(d) Question #3: A third Mishnah says, Levi is carrying a barrel of wine; Yehudah, a jug of honey. Yehudah's barrel cracked; Levi spilled out his wine and saved the honey - he only gets paid as a worker (but is not compensated for the wine he sacrificed).
1. First, it calls it a jug; later, it calls it a barrel!
(e) Answer (Rav Papa - to all 3 questions): The 2 words are interchangeable.
(f) Question: Why does the Tana bother to teach this?
(g) Answer: It is relevant to commerce.
(h) Question: In what case?
1. Suggestion: If in an area where a jug is not called a barrel, and vice-versa - one must give what the buyer requested!
(i) Answer: The case is, most people call a jug 'Kad' and a barrel 'Chavis'; a minority of people call a barrel 'Kad' and a jug 'Chavis'.
1. One might have thought, we go after the majority (and a buyer that asked for a Chavis may demand a barrel!)

2. We hear, this is not so - in money matters, we do not follow the majority.
(a) (Mishnah): Shimon came and tripped on it, and it broke - Shimon is exempt from paying for it.
(b) Question: Why is Shimon exempt - he should look where he walks!
(c) Answer #1 (Rav): The case is, Reuven filled the public domain with jugs.
(d) Answer #2 (Shmuel): The case is, it was dark.
(e) Answer #3 (R. Yochanan): The jug was around a corner, out of his sight.
1. Question (Rav Papa): The language of the Mishnah does not fit Rav's explanation.
i. According to Rav, why does the Mishnah say 'he tripped' - he should be exempt even if he intentionally breaks it!
2. Answer (Rav Zvid): Yes - even if he breaks it, he is exempt; the Mishnah gave the case of tripping, so the end of the Mishnah can teach, if Shimon (tripped and) got hurt, Reuven must pay.
i. If Shimon broke it and got hurt, Reuven would be exempt.
ii. Question: Why?
iii. Answer: He brought the damage on himself.
3. Since the end of the Mishnah is a case of tripping, also the beginning of the Mishnah was taught by tripping.
(f) Answer #4 (R. Aba): Shimon is exempt, because people normally do not look where they walk.
(g) There was a case in Nehardai - Shmuel obligated one who tripped to pay; there was a case in Pumbadisa - Rava obligated one who tripped to paying.
1. Shmuel is consistent with his explanation of the Mishnah.
2. Suggestion: We can deduce that Rava holds as Shmuel.
3. Rejection (Rav Papa): He could hold that one who trips is exempt; he ruled in a case of vessels left near the corner of the olive-press.
i. Since the owner was allowed to leave his vessels there (such is the custom), one who walks must watch his step; since he did not, he must pay.
(a) (Rav Chisda): The custom is, one who kicks someone with his knee must pay 3 Sela'im (for embarrassment alone); for kicking with the foot, 5 Sela'im; for hitting him with a donkey's saddle, 13;
(b) Question (Rav Chisda): How much must he pay for hitting him with the handle or blade of a shovel?
1. Objection (Rav Nachman): We do not obligate people to pay fines in Bavel! What was the case (for which you ask)?
2. Answer (Rav Chisda): There were 2 partners in a pit of water. Each day, one of them would water his field from it. One day, one was using it on his partner's day.
3. The partner protested, to no avail. He hit the one using it with the handle of a shovel.
(c) Answer (Rav Nachman): He can hit him 100 times, he is exempt!
1. Even the opinion that says that one may not take the law into his own hands, admits that to avoid a loss, one may.
(d) (Rav Yehudah): One may not take the law into his own hands;
(e) (Rav Nachman): One may take the law into his own hands.
(f) All agree, to avoid a loss, one may take the law into his own hands; they argue when there is no loss.
1. Rav Yehudah says, he may not take the law into his own hands - he can go to Beis Din!
2. Rav Nachman says, he may take the law into his own hands - since he is doing properly, he need not exert himself to go to Beis Din.
(g) Question (Rav Kahana - Beraisa): Ben Bag Bag says, do not enter your friend's property to take what is yours without permission - perhaps you will appear as a thief to him; rather, blunt his teeth and say, 'I am taking what is mine'!
(h) Answer #1 (Rav Yehudah): Ben Bag Bag holds as Rav Nachman - but Chachamim argue, and hold as me!
(i) Answer #2 (R. Yanai): 'Blunt his teeth' means, legally (in Beis Din)!
(j) Objections: If so, why does it say 'Say to him' - it should say, 'We say to him'! If so, why does it say 'I take what is mine' - it should say, 'He is taking what is his'! 1. This is left difficult.
Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,