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 76
1) MAKING A STOLEN ANIMAL HEKDESH
(a) (Mishnah): Reuven stole an animal, made it Hekdesh then
slaughtered or sold it (he only pays double).
2) THE EXEMPTION OF HEKDESH
(b) We understand why he does not pay 4 or 5 for slaughtering
it - he slaughters the animal of Hekdesh, not of the
(c) Question: He should pay 4 or 5 for making it Hekdesh -
giving to Hekdesh is as selling to a person!
(d) Answer #1: The Mishnah is as R. Shimon, who says that
Kodshim by which there is responsibility (to bring
another if it becomes lost or blemished) are considered
to be in the jurisdiction of the original owner.
(e) Question: Since R. Shimon taught the end of the Mishnah,
the beginning of the Mishnah is not R. Shimon!
(f) Answer #2: Rather, the Mishnah speaks of Kodshei Kalim;
it is as R. Yosi ha'Galili, who holds that they are
considered the property of the owner, and are in the
(g) Question: What would he say by Kodshei Kodoshim - that he
pays 4 or 5 for them?
1. If so, why does the beginning of the Mishnah teach,
if he stole an animal, slaughtered it and made it
Hekdesh, he pays 4 or 5 - it should distinguish
within the case of slaughtering after making it
(h) Answer: Even by Kodshei Kodoshim, he is exempt; we
distinguish between giving to Hekdesh and selling to a
i. It should say, he is only exempt from 4 or 5 by
Kodshei Kalim - but by Kodshei Kodoshim, he is
1. When one sells to a person, the animal changes from
being Shimon's ox to Levi's ox;
2. When one gives to Hekdesh, the animal is called
Shimon's ox before and after the Hekdesh!
(a) (Mishnah): R. Shimon says...
(b) Question: Granted, R. Shimon does not distinguish between
giving to Hekdesh and selling to a person - but he should
say to the contrary!
1. By Kodshim for which one has responsibility, he
should be exempt, for they are still in the original
(c) Answer: R. Shimon refers to a different matter.
2. By Kodshim for which there is no responsibility, he
should be liable, for they leave the original
1. One who steals from a thief, or Hekdesh from its
owner's house, does not pay 4 or 5.
(d) Question: But R. Shimon holds that slaughter that does
not permit the meat is not considered slaughter -
slaughter of Kodshim (outside the Mikdash) does not
permit the meat!
2. Question: Why is he exempt for Hekdesh?
3. Answer: "And it was stolen from the man's house" -
not from the house of Hekdesh.
i. R. Shimon says, by Kodshim for which there is
responsibility, he is liable.
ii. Question: What is his reason?
iii. Answer: By Kodshim for which there is
responsibility, it is considered stealing from
the owner's house;
iv. By Kodshim for which there is no
responsibility, it is not considered stealing
from the owner's house.
(e) Answer #1 (Rav Dimi, citing R. Yochanan): The case is, it
was unblemished, he slaughtered it in the Mikdash for the
sake of the owner.
1. Question: If so, it is as if he returned the animal
to its owner!
(f) Answer #2 (Ravin, citing R. Yochanan): The case is, it
was unblemished, he slaughtered it in the Mikdash not for
the sake of the owner.
2. Answer (R. Yitzchak bar Avin): The case is, the
blood spilled (invalidating the sacrifice).
(g) Answer #3 (Reish Lakish): The case is, it was blemished,
he slaughtered it outside the Mikdash.
3) SOMETHING THAT WAS FITTING
(a) Objection (R. Elazar): These slaughters do not permit the
1. According to R. Yochanan - slaughter does not permit
the sacrifice, throwing the blood permits it;
according to Reish Lakish, slaughter does not permit
the animal, redemption permits it!
(b) Answer: R. Shimon holds, whenever the blood is standing
to be thrown (i.e. after slaughter), it is as if it was
thrown (i.e. as if slaughter permits the animal
1. He also holds, whenever an animal is standing to be
redeemed (i.e. after slaughter), we view it as if it
was redeemed (and permitted immediately).
2. (Beraisa - R. Shimon): Sometimes, Nosar (Kodshim
that was not eaten in the allowed time and is now
forbidden) receives Tum'ah (of foods), sometimes it
i. If the time for eating passed and the blood was
never thrown, it does not receive Tum'ah;
3. R. Shimon means, if the blood was not fit to be
thrown, it does not receive Tum'ah; if it was fit,
it receives Tum'ah.
ii. If the blood was thrown in time, it receives
4. Question: What is considered fit or not fit to be
5. Answer: It was slaughtered right before sunset,
there was no time to throw it, it was not fit; if it
was slaughtered with enough time to throw it, it was
6. This shows, he holds that any (blood) fit to be
thrown, it is as if it was thrown (and the meat