(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 28


(a) What does the Beraisa say about a case where Reuven pulls his own ox away from under Shimon's attacking ox, causing it to fall and die?

(b) Assuming that the Tana is talking about a Mu'ad, what Kashya does this pose on Rav Yehudah?

(c) How do we resolve the Kashya?

(d) In that case, in the Seifa, where Reuven killed Shimon's ox by pushing it away, why does the Tana obligate Reuven to pay?

(a) And what does another Beraisa say about a case where Shimon fills Reuven's Chatzer with barrels of wine and oil (see Maharam)?

(b) How does Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak establish this Beraisa? What prompted Shimon to do what he did?

(c) How does this answer the Kashya?

(a) And what does a third Beraisa say about a master who wounds his servant who had his ear pierced, as he tries to evict him from his house, when the Yovel arrives, but who refuses to leave?

(b) He learns this from the Pasuk in Ma'sei "ve'Lo Sikchu Kofer *la'Shuv*", which might mean that a master may not accept any form of bribe from the servant who wishes to return to his servitude.
What else might "La'shuv" mean?

(c) We therefore establish the Beraisa by a servant who begins to steal. Seeing as he did not steal until now, why should he suddenly begin to steal now?

(d) What does Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak mean when he establishes the Beraisa by a servant whose master handed him a Shifchah Cana'anis? How does that answer the Kashya?

(a) We learned in our Mishnah that if Reuven tripped over the barrel that Shimon left in the street and broke it, he is not liable for the damage. What can we extrapolate from there?

(b) How does Rav Z'vid in the name of Rava refute the proof from here that one may not take the law into one's own hands?

(a) How does the Beraisa interpret the Pasuk, which writes (regarding a woman who grabs the man who attacked her husband in an indecent manner) "ve'Katzosah es Kapah"?

(b) How do we initially establish the Beraisa (and the Pasuk) in a way that will pose a Kashya even on Rav Yehudah?

(c) What does the Seifa of the Beraisa learn from "ve'Shalchah Yadah"?

(d) If, as we conclude, the Pasuk is speaking when there is another way of saving her husband, why does the Beraisa not learn *that* from the Pasuk, instead of switching to a Sheli'ach Beis-Din?

(a) What does the Beraisa say about someone through whose field a public path runs, if he takes the current path for himself and replaces it with a fresh one that runs at the side of the field?

(b) In view of the ruling that one is permitted to take the law into his own hands, what should the Tana have said?

(c) According to Rav Z'vid in the name of Rava, the reason that he cannot is due to a decree that he might give them a crooked path.
What does Rav Mesharshaya say? How does he establish the Beraisa?

(d) Rav Ashi says that a path at the side of his field (as opposed to one in the middle) is considered crooked, and the reason that he cannot reclaim the one at the side is because of a statement by Rav Yehudah.
What did Rav Yehudah say about a path which is used by the public?

(a) What does the Beraisa say about someone who left Pe'ah in one corner of his field, whereas the poor came and took Pe'ah from another corner?

(b) How does Rava interpret the Beraisa, in view of the principle that a person is permitted to take the law into his own hands?

(c) The source of Rava's explanation lies in a Beraisa.
What does the Beraisa say in a case where someone declares his vineyard Hefker and then gets up in the morning and picks the grapes with regard to ...

  1. ... Peret and Olelos, Shich'chah and Pe'ah?
  2. ... Ma'aser?
(d) On what basis does the Tana...
  1. ... obligate the owner to leave Peret and Olelos, Shich'chah and Pe'ah (in spite of the fact that genuine Hefker is Patur from Pe'ah)?
  2. ... exempt him from Ma'aser?
(a) The Tana Kama of our Mishnah obligates Shimon to pay, if his water-jug breaks in the street and Reuven slips in the water or hurts himself on the broken pieces.
What does Rebbi Yehudah say?

(b) According to Rav Yehudah Amar Rav, the Tana is speaking specifically when Reuven dirtied his clothes *in the water* (or tore them on the broken pieces of earthenware).
How will he hold in a case where he slipped and hurt himself *on the ground*?

(c) What is the basic Chiyuv of Bor according to Rav?

Answers to questions



(a) When Rav Yehudah told Shmuel that Rav had established our Mishnah when it was not the man who got hurt when he tripped, but his clothes that got dirtied, Shmuel objected.
What was his objection?

(b) Seeing as Adam is also Patur by Bor, what is the advantage of establishing our Mishhah by Adam rather than by Keilim?

(c) How would Rav counter Shmuel's argument? Is it not true that we learn 'Avno, Sakino u'Masa'o' from Bor?

(d) What is the basic Machlokes between Rav and Shmuel with regard to a Bor bi'Reshuso (bearing in mind that as long as the Bor and the land in which it has been dug both belong to the owner, he cannot be liable for Nezikin)?

(a) Rav Oshaya cites a Beraisa from which he asks on both Rav and Shmuel. What does the Tana Darshen from the Pasuk "ve'Nafal Shamah *Shor* O *Chamor*"?

(b) What will therefore be the Din if an ox falls into a pit with its wooden accessories which break, or a donkey with its leather accessories which tear, and both animals die?

(c) Why do we find it necessary to amend the words 'Ha *le'Mah Zeh Domeh*, le'Avno, Sakino u'Masa'o she'Hinichan bi'Reshus ha'Rabim ve'Hiziku'? How does the amended version read?

(d) What does the Seifa say about a case where Reuven's jug breaks on Shimon's stone?

(a) How does ...
  1. ... the Reisha pose a Kashya on Rav?
  2. ... the Seifa pose a Kashya on Shmuel?
(b) On what grounds do we object to the dual Kashya on Rav and Shmuel?

(c) How does ...

  1. ... Rav establish the Reisha?
  2. ... Shmuel establish the Seifa? Who is the author?
(a) Rebbi Elazar establishes our Mishnah when the man tripped on *the stone* and hurt himself on it.
What will be the Din if he tripped on the ground and hurt himself on the stone?

(b) Why can the author of our Mishnah not then be Rebbi Nasan? What does Rebbi Nasan say?

(c) What is the alternative version of Rebbi Elazar's statement?

(a) According to Rabah, when Rebbi Yehudah in our Mishnah says that if Reuven slips in the water or hurts himself on the broken pieces, Shimon is only liable if he did so deliberately, he means that he specifically intended to lower the water-jug from his shoulder.
What does Abaye find difficult with this explanation?

(b) On which Pasuk in Ki Seitzei does Abaye base his Kashya?

(c) How does Rabah attempt to reconcile his explanation with the principle 'O'nes Rachmana Patreih'?

(d) On what basis do we prove him wrong?

Answers to questions

Next daf


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