(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 58


(a) (Mishnah): If it fell into a garden and benefited, Reuven pays the benefit (not the full damage).
(b) (Rav): The case is, it fell on fruits.
1. Question: We may infer, if it ate them, he does not pay at all!
i. Suggestion: This is as Rav holds, the animal should not have eaten.
ii. Rejection: No - he only said that to exempt the owner of fruits, when the animal ate and was damaged; Rav would not say this is a reason to exempt it when it damages.
2. Answer: No, rather Rav teaches a bigger Chidush;
i. Not only when it ate, it pays the benefit, but even when it fell on fruits - we do not say, the fruits merely 'chased a lion' (prevented damage) so Reuven is exempt.
ii. Question: Why don't we say this?
iii. Answer #1: That exemption is only when he intended to prevent damage - here, he did not.
iv. Answer #2: That exemption is only when the chaser did not suffer a loss - here, he lost.
(c) Question: How did the animal fall?
(d) Answer #1 (Rav Kahana): It slipped on its urine.
(e) Answer #2 (Rava): Another animal (of Reuven) pushed it.
1. Rava agrees, all the more so if it slipped on its urine, it pays the benefit.
2. But Rav Kahana would say, if another animal pushed it, it pays the damage - they should have been led single file, it was negligence to lead them side by side.
(f) (Rav Kahana): It (only) pays the benefit in the patch it fell into - but if it entered another patch, it pays the damage.
(g) (R. Yochanan): Even if it entered another patch, even if it eats all day long, it only pays the benefit, until it leaves and returns knowingly.
(h) (Rav Papa): He does not mean that Reuven finds out and does not lock it up properly (minimal guarding) - rather, once he finds out that it left, even if he locks it properly.
(i) Question: Why is this?
(j) Answer: Once it found a place to eat, it will return whenever it can (so it must be guarded well).
(a) (Mishnah): If it entered normally, it pays the damage.
(b) Question (R. Yirmeyah): If it entered normally and damaged through water of birth - what is the law?
1. According to the opinion that one who was negligent to start and Ones at the end is liable, surely he is liable;
2. The question is according to the opinion that negligence at the start does not obligate one for Ones at the end:
i. Is this also negligence to start and Ones at the end, so he is exempt?
ii. Or - is this all negligence - since he knew it would give birth soon, he should have been careful with it?

iii. This question is unresolved.
(a) (Mishnah): We evaluate the damage (by evaluating a Beis Se'ah...)
(b) Question: From where do we know this?
(c) Answer (Rav Masnah): "It will consume in a different field" - we evaluate the damage based on another field.
(d) Question: We need that verse to exempt (Shen) in a public domain!
(e) Answer: If it only came to teach that, it should say 'his friend's field' or 'a different field';
1. It says "In a different field" to teach that we evaluate the damage as if it was in another field.
(f) Question: Perhaps the verse only comes to teach that!
(g) Answer: If so, it should have been written by the payments - 'From the best of his field and vineyard he will pay in another field';
1. It was written by the damage so we learn both.
(h) Question: How do we evaluate?
(i) Answer #1 (R. Yosi bar Chanina): (How much the damaged area would decrease the value of) a Beis Se'ah sold as part of a field of 60 Beis Se'ah (larger fields are proportionally cheaper, since only rich people can buy them).
(j) Answer #2 (R. Yanai): A half-Beis Se'ah among (as part of a field of) 60 times as big. (Me'iri, Maharam Shif - how much the damaged area would decrease the value of) a Beis Se'ah sold as part of a field of 30 Beis Se'ah.)
(k) Answer #3 (Chizkiyah): The amount eaten among 60 times as much.
(l) Question (Beraisa): If it ate 1 or 2 Kavim, we evaluate as (among) a small patch.
1. Suggestion: We evaluate the small patch by itself.
(m) Answer: No - as part of a field 60 times bigger (each Amora as his opinion).
(n) (Beraisa): We do not estimate the value of 1 Kav, for this makes it better; we do not estimate the value of a Beis Kor (1 Kor is 30 Se'ah), for this makes it worse.
1. Question: What does this mean?
2. Answer #1 (Rav Papa): We do not estimate the value of 1 Kav (eaten) among 60 Kavim, for this favors the damager; we do not estimate the value of 1 Kor (eaten) among 60 times as much, for this hurts the damager. (Rather, we estimate 1 Se'ah in 60.)
3. Question (Rav Huna bar Mano'ach): If so, it should not say 'a Beis Kor', rather 'a Kor' (since that was eaten)!
4. Answer #2 (Rav Huna bar Mano'ach): We do not estimate the value of 1 Kav (eaten) alone, for this favors the damagee; nor do we estimate it among a Beis Kor, for this hurts the damagee;
i. Rather, we evaluate it among 60 times as much.
(a) Reuven cut down Shimon's date tree.
1. Reish Galusa: I saw, there were 3 trees together there, they were worth 100 in all - Reuven must pay 1 third of this.
2. Reuven: That is as Persians rule! I will go to Rav Nachman.
3. Rav Nachman: We evaluate among 60 times as much.
4. Rava: That was said when a man's money damages - does it apply when a man himself damages?
5. Abaye (to Rava): Do you learn a man's damage from the following Beraisa?
i. (Beraisa): Levi ruined Yehudah's vineyard when the grapes were unripe - we see how much it was worth before, and how much it is worth now.
ii. The Beraisa does not mention 60.
6. Abaye: That is no proof - there is a similar Beraisa regarding damage by an animal!
i. (Beraisa - R. Yosi): (An animal) cut the top off a young tree. Those that make decrees in Yerushalayim decreed that it pays 2 (silver coins) for a first year tree, 4 for a second year tree.
ii. R. Yosi ha'Gelili says, if it ate fodder, we evaluate the remnant, what it is worth at harvest time; Chachamim say, we see how much it was worth before, and how much it is worth now.
iii. R. Yehoshua says, if it ate Smader (immature grapes right after budding) - we view them as if they were ready to be harvested; Chachamim say, we see how much it was worth before, and how much it is worth now.
iv. R. Shimon ben Yehudah says, this is only when it ate grapes or figs that were just budding; but if it ate Pagim or Boser (proper grapes or figs that are not fully grown), we view them as if they were ready to be harvested.
7. Abaye: Chachamim say, we see how much it was worth before, and how much it is worth now - they did not mention 60, but we know that is the law;
i. The same applies to the Beraisa of a man that damaged!
Next daf


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