POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
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 57
BAVA KAMA 57 (Rosh Hashanah) - dedicated by Rabbi Eli Turkel and his wife, Jeri. May
they be blessed with much Nachas from their children and grandchildren and may all of
their prayers be answered l'Tovah!
1) ONE WATCHING A LOST OBJECT
(a) (Rabah): One watching a lost object is considered a
Shomer Chinam" (he is exempt if it stolen or if he loses
2) ONE WHO CLAIMS THE ITEM WAS STOLEN
(b) (Rav Yosef): He is considered a Shomer Sachar (and liable
for loss or theft).
1. Rabah says he is considered a Shomer Chinam, for he
gets no benefit.
(c) Question (Rav Yosef - Beraisa): If the finder returned it
to a place where the owner can see it, this is enough; if
it was stolen or lost, he is liable.
2. [Version #1: Rav Yosef says he considered a Shomer
Sachar - it is a Mitzvah to watch a lost object, and
this Mitzvah exempts him from having to give
Tzedakah to a poor man that requests.]
3. [Version #2: Rav Yosef says, since the Torah forced
him to watch the object, he is like a Shomer
1. Question: From where was it stolen or lost?
(d) Answer (Rabah): No, from where he returned it to.
i. Suggestion: From the finder's house. (This is
as Rav Yosef.)
(e) Question: But the Beraisa says, if he returned it to
there, this is enough!
(f) Answer: The case is, he returned it in the afternoon; the
Beraisa teaches 2 laws.
1. If the finder returned it in the morning to a place
where the owner normally goes and can see it, this
(g) Question (Beraisa): He is always liable (for loss or
theft) until he returns it to his premises.
2. If he returned it in the afternoon to a place it can
be seen, but the owner doesn't normally go there, if
it was stolen or lost, he is liable.
1. Suggestion: This means, even (if it was stolen or
lost) from the finder's house - this shows, he is a
(h) Answer: Rabah admits that one who finds an animal is
responsible for theft and loss - since the animal learned
to roam, it must be watched better.
(i) Question (Rabah - Beraisa): "Return" - to his house; "you
will return them" - even to his garden or (deserted)
1. Question: What is the case, to his garden or ruin?
(j) Answer (Rav Yosef): Really, they are guarded; the Beraisa
teaches that we do not need the owner to know that they
i. Suggestion: If they are guarded - this is just
as returning to his house!
2. Answer: Rather, they are not guarded - this shows,
the finder is as a Shomer Chinam (if suffices to do
even a minimal guarding)!
1. (R. Elazar): In all cases, the owner must know when
his article was returned, except for a lost object,
for the Torah obligated "many returnings."
(a) Question (Abaye on Rav Yosef): R, Chiya bar Aba cited R.
Yochanan to say that one who found a lost object and
(falsely) swore that it was stolen from him (and it was
later found that the finder had it), he pays double, as a
1. If a finder is a Shomer Sachar - even if claims it
was stolen, he must pay (he was not trying to steal,
he would not pay double)!
(b) Answer (Rav Yosef): The case is, he claimed that armed
robbers stole it (to exempt himself, for that is Ones).
(c) Question (Abaye): Armed robbers never pay double, only
(d) Answer (Rav Yosef): Since they hide from people, they are
as thieves to pay double.
(e) Question (Abaye - Beraisa): You cannot learn from a
Shomer Chinam, who pays double, to a Shomer Sachar, who
does not pay double.
1. If armed robbers are as thieves and pay double, also
a Shomer Chinam can pay double (when he claims that
armed robbers took it)!
2. Answer (Rav Yosef): The Beraisa says: You cannot
learn from a Shomer Chinam, who pays double on any
(false) claim (of theft), to a Shomer Sachar, who
only pays double by a claim of armed robbers.
(a) Question (Abaye - Beraisa): "If it was broken or died" -
how do we know (that a borrower is liable) even if it was
stolen or lost?
1. A Kal va'Chomer teaches this: a Shomer Sachar is
exempt when it is broken or dies, but is liable for
theft or loss - a borrower, who is liable when it is
broken or dies, all the more so he is liable for
theft or loss; no question may be asked on this Kal
(b) Answer (Rav Yosef): This Tana holds that a Shomer Sachar
is more lenient, since he can swear (that armed robbers
took it) and be exempt, even though this can lead to
2. If armed robbers are as thieves and pay double, we
may ask a question - a Shomer Sachar sometimes pays
double (when he claims armed robbers took it), a
borrower never pays double (and is more lenient in
(c) Suggestion: A Beraisa supports Rav Yosef.
1. (Beraisa): Reuven rented a cow from Shimon; it was
stolen. Reuven said, I will pay and not swear; the
thief was found - he pays double to Reuven.
(d) Rejection #1: Perhaps it is the ruling of R. Meir, who
says that a renter is as a Shomer Chinam (and he claimed
that a (regular) thief stole it).
2. Assumption: This is as R. Yehudah, who says that a
renter is as a Shomer Sachar; since Reuven said, I
will pay and not swear, this implies that he could
have sworn and not paid.
3. The case is, he claimed that armed robbers took it;
if they are found later, they pay double!
(e) Rejection #2: It is the ruling of R. Yehudah, according
to Rabah bar Avuha, who says that R. Yehudah holds that a
renter is as a Shomer Chinam.
(f) Rejection #3 (R. Zeira): The case is, Reuven claimed that
armed robbers took it; later, it was found that a thief