(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 Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf

Bava Kama 16


(a) Rebbi Elazar Amar Rav establishes both the Reisha of our Mishnah ('ha'Shen Mu'edes Le'echol' ... 'ha'Beheimah Einah Mu'edes Le'shalem Kuleih', Aval Chatzi Nezek Meshalemes) and the Seifa 'Shor ha'Mu'ad ve'Shor ha'Mazik bi'Reshus ha'Nizak', like Rebbi Tarfon.
How must he establish the Reisha, in order not to clash with the Seifa?

(b) We reject this interpretation however, on the basis of the ruling 'ha'Shen Mu'edes Le'echol es ha'Ra'uy Lah'.
Why can this not go like Rebbi Tarfon?

(c) We therefore amend the Mishnah and establish it entirely like the Rabbanan of Rebbi Tarfon.
According to the new interpretation, how do we now explain the five Mu'adin?

(d) And we now try to amalgamate the second and third sections of the Mishnah to read 've'Shen va'Regel Mu'adin mi'Techilasan. ve'Heichan Ha'adasan be'Chatzar ha'Nizak', dispensing with 've'Shor ha'Mu'ad bi'Reshus ha'Nizak' altogether.
Based on a Mishnah in Keitzad ha'Regel, on what grounds does Ravina repudiate this explanation?

(a) Ravina agrees with the amendment to the first clause.
How does amend the second 'problematic' clause by adding to it without actually changing it?

(b) And how does he then explain the final clause 'ha'Adam ha'Ze'ev, ve'ha'Ari ... ' into the context of the Mishnah?

(c) How do we know that Ravina's interpretation of our Mishnah is the correct one?

(a) How does Rebbi Elazar initially qualify 've'Lo Li'rvotz' in our Mishnah?

(b) We try to prove Rebbi Elazar right from the Beraisa 'ha'Beheimah Mu'edes Le'halech ke'Darkah u'Le'shaber u'Le'ma'ech es ha'Adam, ve'es ha'Beheimah ve'es ha'Keilim', which would otherwise clash with our Mishnah.
How do we refute this proof? How else might we interpret the Beraisa?

(c) In a second Lashon, Rebbi Elazar actually compares large vessels to small ones as regards 'Revitzah', and again, we try and prove his opinion from the Beraisa and refute the proof (in the reverse order that we did in the first Lashon). In a third Lashon, we point out the discrepancy between our Mishnah and the Beraisa.
How does Rebbi Elazar resolve the discrepancy?

(a) According to Rav Yehudah, a 'Bardeles' is a 'Nifraza', which Rav Yosef says, is synonymous with an 'Afa'. Rebbi Meir, in a Beraisa, adds a Tzavu'a to the list of Mu'adin.
Why does this pose a Kashya on Rav Yosef's translation of Bardeles? How does Rav Yosef himself translate 'Tzavu'a'?

(b) We answer by establishing our Mishnah by a male Tzavu'a, and Rebbi Meir by a female one.
Which one is called an Afa?

(c) Then how could Rav Yosef describe Rebbi Meir's Tzavu'a as 'Afa'?

(a) Alternatively, the Bardeles in our Mishnah is a female Tzavu'a, and that of Rebbi Meir is a male one.
Which one is called an Afa?

(b) Whom is Rav Yosef now coming to explain?

(c) Then why did Rav Yosef find it neccesary to explain specifically Rebbi Meir?

(a) If, as the Beraisa says ...
  1. ... a male Tzavu'a changes its form every seven years, to become first a bat, then a vampire-bat and then a thistle-bush, what other two things is it destined to become?
  2. ... after seven years, the spinal cord is supposed to become a snake,
    What must one do to prevent this from happening?
(b) In the above-mentioned Beraisa, Rebbi Elazar adds (to the opinion of Rebbi Meir), 'Af ha'Nachash'.
What is the problem with this? How does this clash with Rebbi Elazar's own opinion in our Mishnah?

(c) And how do we amend Rebbi Elazar in the Beraisa to answer this Kashya?

Answers to questions



(a) Shmuel rules that 'Ari bi'Reshus ha'Rabim, Daras ve'Achal, Patur, Taraf ve'Achal, Chayav'.
What is the definition of ...
  1. ... 'Daras'?
  2. ... 'Taraf'?
(b) It is obvious that Shmuel says 'Daras ve'Achal Patur', because it is Shen bi'Reshus ha'Rabim.
But why does he then say 'Taraf ve'Achal Chayav'?

(c) Shmuel concedes however, that a lion will kill its prey for the benefit of its family, and that is how he explains the Pasuk in Nachum "Aryeh Taraf Badei Gurosav, u'Mechanek le'Liv'osav, Va'yemalei Teref Chorav u'Me'onosav T'reifah".
What is the definition of ...

  1. ... "Gurasov"?
  2. ... "Lib'osav"?
  3. ... "Chorav"?
  4. ... "Me'onosav"?
(a) We try to resolve Shmuel with the Beraisa 've'Chein Chayah she'Nichnesah le'Chatzar ha'Nizak, Tarfah Beheimah ve'Achlah Basar, Meshalem Nezek Shalem' by establishing it when the lion initially killed the animal to take home to its lair. One of the two reasons that we reject this suggestion is on the grounds that there is no way of reading the lion's mind in that way.
What is the second reason?

(b) What does Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak mean when he says 'li'Tzedadin ka'Tani'? How does he amend the Beraisa to read?

(c) On what grounds do we refute Ravina's suggestion establishing Shmuel's second statement ('Taraf ve'Achal Chayav') in the case of a tame lion according to Rebbi Elazar (otherwise it would be Shen bi'Reshus ha'Rabim and he would be Patur)?

(d) So we establish Ravina on the Beraisa ('ve'Chein Chayah she'Nichnesah ... Meshalem Nezek Shalem').
On what grounds do we refute ...

  1. ... that too?
  2. ... the suggestion that the Tana is talking about when the tame lion had become a Mu'ad?
(a) We already discussed our Mishnah which draws two distinctions between a Tam and a Mu'ad, inasmuch as a Tam pays half damages from the body of the damaging ox, whereas a Mu'ad pays full damages 'min ha'Aliyah'.
What does 'min ha'Aliyah' mean?

(b) They also buried Chizkiyah ha'Melech "*be'Ma'aleh* Kivrei Beis David" (Divrei Hayamim).
What does this mean? Where did they bury him?

(c) The Pasuk also writes there that they buried him in a grave that was full of Besamim ve'Zanim. One interpretation of "ve'Zanim" is all different kinds of Besamim.
What does it mean according to the second interpretation?

(d) Who is 'him' referring to?

(a) When Yirmiyah spoke of the pit that the people dug to trap him, he was referring to the sin of adultery with a prostitute of which they accused him, according to Rebbi Elazar (which meant transgressing the La'av of "Ishah Zonah ... Lo Yikachu", since Yirmiyah was a Kohen - Tosfos).
How does Rebbi Shmuel bar Nachmeni interpret it?

(b) According to Rebbi Elazar, the 'pit' referred to by Yirmiyah fits with the Pasuk in Mishlei "Ki Shuchah Amukah Zonah".
But where do we find any allusion to a pit with regard to the sin of adultery with a married woman?

(c) According to Rebbi Shmuel bar Nachmeni, the Pasuk in Yirmiyah "ve'Atah Hashem Yada'ta es Kol Machshevosam *la'Mus*" is self-understood.
But how does Rebbi Elazar explain it?

(d) What did Yirmiyah mean when he prayed "Yih'yu Muchshalim Lefanecha ... "?

(a) "ve'Kavod Asu Lo be'Moso" (Divrei Hayamim, concerning the death of Chizkiyahu Hamelech).
What Kavod did they do for Chizkiyah after his death?

(b) Rebbi Nasan and the Rabbanan argue over whether this lasted for three days or seven days.
What does a third opinion hold?

(c) What is the significance of these three opinions?

Answers to questions

Next daf


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