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 60
1) SENDING A FIRE
(a) (Mishnah): Reuven sent a fire with a deaf person, lunatic
or child - Beis Din cannot make him pay, but Hash-m holds
2) LIABILITY FOR A FIRE
1. If he sent a fire with a healthy adult, the adult is
(b) Shimon brought the flame, Levi brought the wood - Levi is
(c) Shimon brought the wood, Levi brought the flame - Levi is
1. If Yehudah came and blew the flame - he is liable;
(d) (Gemara - Reish Lakish): Reuven is only exempt (at the
hands of Beis Din) when he sent a coal with a deaf
person, lunatic or child, and the messenger fanned it -
but if he sent a flame, Beis Din makes him pay.
2. If the wind fanned the flame, all are exempt.
1. Question: Why is he liable if he sent a flame?
(e) (R. Yochanan): Even if he sent a flame, he is exempt.
2. Answer: This will surely cause damage.
1. Question: Why is this?
(f) Reuven is only liable if he sends thorns, thin wood, and
a lamp - then, he surely caused the damage!
2. Answer: The messenger's holding of the flame caused
(g) (Mishnah): (...If Yehudah came and blew the flame).
(h) (Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak): Both "Libah and Nivah (blew)"
are reasonable texts of the Mishnah.
(i) (Mishnah): If the wind fanned the flame, all are exempt.
(j) (Beraisa): Yehudah blew and the wind fanned the flame -
if Yehudah's blowing was enough, he is liable; if not, he
(k) Question: Why is this? This should be as one who winnows
with the wind (this is liable on Shabbos)!
(l) Answer #1 (Abaye): The case is, Yehudah blew from 1 side,
the wind from the other (so Yehudah did not assist the
(m) Answer #2 (Rava): When Yehudah was blowing, a normal wind
was blowing; later, an abnormal wind spread the flame.
(n) Answer #3 (R. Zeira): He did not really blow, he just
exhaled as one warming his hands.
(o) Answer #4 (Rav Ashi): One who winnows with the wind is
liable only regarding Shabbos, where the Torah forbids
1. Here, the blower only helped cause damage -
causation of damage is exempt.
(a) (Mishnah): Reuven sent a fire; it consumed wood, stones
or dirt - he is liable - "When a fire will go and find
thorns, and a stack is consumed or standing crop or the
field, the one who burned will pay".
3) WHAT TO DO AT TIMES OF PUNISHMENT
(b) (Gemara - Rava) Question: Why must the Torah write
"thorns", "a stack", "standing crop" and "the field"?
(c) Answer: If it only wrote "thorns" - one might have
thought, one is only liable for thorns, since they are
used for fires and people are not careful with them;
(d) If it only wrote "a stack" - one might have thought, one
is only liable for "a stack", for this is a big loss, but
not for thorns.
(e) We need "standing crop" to teaches that one is only
liable for exposed things.
1. R. Yehudah says that fire is liable even for
concealed things - what does he learn from "the
(f) We need "The field" to obligate for scorching a plowed
field or rocks.
2. Answer: To include everything of stature (trees and
3. Chachamim learn this from "or the standing crop".
4. R. Yehudah says, we need "or" to know that one
liable for burning even 1 of these!
5. Chachamim learn that from "or" written before
6. R. Yehudah says, since "or" had to be said once, it
was said twice for parallel structure.
(g) Question: Had the Torah written "the field", all the more
so one is liable for thorns, stacks and standing crops!
(h) Answer: That would not have sufficed - had the Torah only
written "the field", one might have thought one is only
liable for what is in the field (not the ground itself).
(a) (Rav Shmuel bar Nachmani): Punishments only come to the
world when the wicked are in the world; the punishments
start with the Tzadikim - "When a fire will go and find
thorns" - the fire erupts when there are thorns;
1. It starts with the Tzadikim - it says "And a stack
is consumed", not "And it will consume a stack" - it
was already consumed.
(b) (Rav Yosef): "No one may leave his house until morning
(on the night of the killing of the firstborn)" - once
the (Angel of death) is allowed to destroy, he kills
Tzadikim as well as the wicked;
1. Moreover, he begins with the Tzadikim - "I will cut
off from you Tzadik and evildoer".
(c) (Rav Yehudah): A person should always start travelling
and end travelling when the sun is out - "No one may
leave his house until morning".
2. Rav Yosef lamented - what does the Tzadik's
righteousness help him?
3. Abaye: It is good that he doesn't see the
destruction - "Before the evil, the Tzadik dies".
(d) (Beraisa): When pestilence is in the city, stay inside -
"No one may leave his house until morning"; also, "Go my
nation, in your room, close the door in back of you";
also, "Outside, the sword will kill; inside, fear".
4) KING DAVID'S QUESTION
(e) Question: Why were all 3 verses needed?
(f) Answer: From the first verse, we would not know by day
(that one must stay inside during pestilence);
1. From the second verse, we would not know to stay
inside even when there is fear inside - perhaps it
is better to be with people outside!
(g) Rava would shut the windows when there was pestilence -
"For death has come in our windows".
(h) (Beraisa): If there is famine in the city, leave - "There
was a famine in the land, and Avram descended to
Mitzrayim to sojourn there"; also, "If we will go to the
city, and there is famine in the city, we will die
(i) Question: Why was the second verse needed?
(j) Answer: From the first verse, we would not know even when
there is possible mortal danger outside the city;
1. This we learn from the continuation of the second
verse - "Let us come...(and if we will die, we will
(k) (Beraisa): If there is pestilence in the city, one should
not walk in the middle of the street, for the Angel of
death goes there - since he has permission to kill, he
1. If there is peace in the city, one should not walk
on the sides of the street, for the Angel of death
goes there - since he has no permission, he goes
(l) (Beraisa): If there is pestilence in the city, one should
not go alone to synagogue, for the Angel of death leaves
his vessels there.
1. This is only when children are not learning there,
and 10 men do not pray there.
(m) (Beraisa): If dogs cry, this shows that the Angel of
death is in the city; if they laugh, this shows that
Eliyahu has come;
1. This does not apply if a female dog is there.
(a) (R. Yitzchak Nafcha): "When a fire will go and find
thorns, and a stack is consumed or standing crop or the
field, the one who burned will pay" - Hash-m said, I must
pay for having burned the Mikdash - I will rebuild it
with fire - "I will be as a wall of fire around
1. The verse started to speak of damage of a man's
property ("When a fire will go" - by itself) and
concludes with a man's damage ("the one who burned")
- this teaches that one is liable for fire as for
(b) Question: "David desired and said 'Who will give me water
(Torah) to drink from the well of Beis Lechem in the gate
(the Sanhedrin)?' Three mighty ones...(drew the water and
gave it to David, but he did not want to drink it)" -
what did he want to know?
(c) Answer #1 (Rava): He wanted to know if fire is liable for
something concealed in a fire (as Chachamim - or, if one
is exempt as, R. Yehudah).
(d) Answer #2 (Rav Huna): Plishtim were hiding in stacks of
barley of Yisrael - he wanted to know if he may save
himself with another's money;
1. The answer was, a commoner may not - but a king may
break down walls to make a path for himself, and no
one may protest.
(e) Answer #3 (Rabanan): There were stacks of barley of
Yisrael, and stacks of lentils of Plishtim; he wanted to
know if he may feed his animal from the barley, on
condition that he will pay with lentils;
1. The answer was, "The pledge he will return, an
evildoer will return the theft" (i.e. (a commoner)
who steals and pays back is called evil) - but a
king may break down walls to make a path for
himself, and no one may protest.
(f) According to Rabanan, we can resolve the verses "There
was a field full of lentils", "There was a field full of
1. Question: According to Rav Huna, why do the verses
(g) According to Rav Huna, we understand "He stood in the
field and saved it" (from being burned).
2. Answer: There were also stacks of lentils, in which
Plishtim were hiding.
1. Question: According to the Rabanan, what was saved?
(h) Question: According to Rava, how do we understand the
2. Answer: They did not take the barley on condition to
(i) Answer: David asked whether fire is liable for concealed
things, and also the question of Rav Huna or Rabanan.
(j) According to Rav Huna and Rabanan, we understand "David
did not want to drink" (to rely on the special right of a
1. Question: According to Rava what does this mean (he
merely received an answer)!
(k) According to Rav Huna and Rabanan, we understand "He
poured them as an offering to Hash-m" - he acted for the
sake of Heaven (he did not want to rely on the special
right of a king).
2. Answer: He would not say the law in their names.
i. David had received from Shmuel, we do not say
laws in the name of one who endangered his life
to learn Torah.
1. Question: According to Rava what does this mean?
2. Answer: He said the law (anonymously) as a