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 Metzia 32
1) STIPULATION IN FRONT OF BEIS DIN
(a) (Mishnah): If there is a Beis Din there, he stipulates in
front of them...
2) WHICH ANIMALS ARE CONSIDERED LOST
(b) Rav Safra and Isar had a joint business venture; Rav
Safra, in front of two people, took half the merchandise
without telling Isar.
(c) Rabah bar Rav Huna: Bring two of the three people in
front of whom you divided, or 2 witnesses that saw you
divide in front of three people.
(d) Question (Rav Safra): How do you know that three are
(e) Answer (Rabah bar Rav Huna - Mishnah): If there is a Beis
Din there, he stipulates in front of them; if not, he
cannot stipulate - he is exempt from returning, because
he would lose money.
(f) Question (Rav Safra): To take money from the loser and
give it the finder requires Beis Din - but I only took
what is mine, I merely clarify that this is my portion -
two witnesses suffice!
(g) Support (Mishnah): A widow can sell (from the estate for
her food) not in front of Beis Din.
(h) Rejection (Abaye): But Rav Yosef bar Minyomi explained,
the Mishnah teaches that she does not need a qualified
Beis Did not, but she must sell in front of three people!
(a) (Mishnah): One who finds an animal in a pen - he need not
return it; if he finds one in the public domain, he must
3) WHEN NOT TO LISTEN TO PARENTS
(b) If it was in a cemetery, a Kohen should not become Tamei
to return it.
(c) If a man told his son (a Kohen) that he should become
Tamei, or if he told him not to return a lost object
(when this was permitted), the son should not listen.
(d) If Reuven helped Shimon load or unload even four or five
times, Reuven must still help - "Azov Ta'azov";
1. If Shimon said, the Mitzvah is upon you, you can
unload it yourself, Reuven is exempt - it says "Imo
(e) The Torah only commands to unload, not to load; R. Shimon
says, even to load.
2. If Shimon is too old or sick to help, Reuven must do
(f) R. Yosi ha'Galili says, if the animal was overloaded,
Reuven is exempt - "Tachas Masa'o (under its burden)" - a
burden fit for it.
(g) (Gemara - Rava): The Mishnah speaks of a pen that does
not induce animals to flee, nor does it guard them.
1. It does not induce animals to flee - since the
Mishnah says he need not return it;
(h) Version #1 (Mishnah): One who finds an animal in a pen -
he is exempt.
2. It does not guard them - if it did, there would be
no need to teach this;
i. Animals found outside, one returns them to a
guarded pen - all the more so, one need not
return animals found in a guarded pen!
(i) (R. Yitzchak): This is when it is within the Techum.
(j) Inference: When it is in the public domain, even within
the Techum, he must return it.
(k) Version #2 (Mishnah): One who finds an animal in the
public domain, he must return it.
(l) (R. Yitzchak): This is when it is outside the Techum.
(m) Inference: When it is in a pen, even outside the Techum,
he is exempt.
(a) (Mishnah): If it was in a cemetery, a Kohen should not
become Tamei to return it.
4) IS LOADING FOR FREE?
(b) (Beraisa) Question: How do we know that if a man told his
son to become Tamei, or not to return a lost object, the
son should not listen?
(c) Answer: "Ish Imo v'Aviv Tira'u v'Es Shabsosai Tishmoru
Ani Hash-m" - you are all obligated to honor Me.
(d) Inference: That is only because of the verse - without
it, we would say that he should listen!
(e) Question: But honoring parents is an Ase, neglecting a
lost object is forbidden by a Lav and Ase - an Ase does
not override a Lav and an Ase!
(f) Answer: Honor of parents is equated to honor of Hash-m -
it says "Kaved Es Avicha v'Es Imecha", and "Kaved Es
Hash-m" - therefore, one might have thought that he
1. The verse teaches, he should not.
(a) (Mishnah): The Torah only commands to unload, not to
load; R. Shimon says, even to load.
(b) Question: What does it mean 'not to load'?
1. If it means, it is not a Mitzvah to load at all -
why is it different than unloading?
(c) Answer: Rather, the Torah only commands to unload for
free, not to load for free; R. Shimon says, even to load
i. We learn unloading from "Azov Ta'azov" -
likewise loading is learned from "Hakim Takim"!
1. (Beraisa): Unloading is for free, loading is for
pay; R. Shimon says, both are for free.
2. Question: What is Chachamim's reason?
3. Answer: If both were for free, the Torah should only
have written loading, we could learn unloading from
a Kal va'Chomer:
i. Loading does not save the owner from a loss,
nor does it save the animal from pain, yet one
is obligated - all the more so unloading, which
saves the owner from a loss and saves the
animal from pain!
4. Rather, we conclude that unloading was written to
teach that unloading is for free, loading is for
5. R. Shimon argues - he says, we cannot tell which
verse speaks of which - if only one verse was
written, we would assume it teaches unloading!
6. Chachamim say, the verses are clear - "Rovetz Tachas
Masa'o (crouching under its load)", and "Nofelim
ba'Derech" (the animal and its load are on the
7. R. Shimon says, "Nofelim ba'Derech" connotes that
the animal fell and the burden is on it.
5) PAIN TO ANIMALS
(a) (Rava): From both Tana'im we learn that the Torah
commands to minimize pain to animals.
1. Even R. Shimon only argues because we cannot tell
which verse speaks of which - if we knew, he would
make the Kal va'Chomer as Chachamim!
(b) Support (for Rava - Mishnah - R. Yosi ha'Galili): If the
animal was overloaded, Reuven is exempt - "Tachas Masa'o
(under its burden)" - a burden fit for it.
2. Suggestion: The Kal va'Chomer is on account of pain
3. Question: Perhaps it is on account of monetary loss
of the owner.
i. One is obligated to load even though it does
not save the owner from a loss - all the more
so unloading, which saves the owner from a
4. Rejection: Sometimes loading does save the owner
from a loss - the delay minimizes the time he will
have to sell his goods at the market, or robbers
will take everything he has!
(c) Inference: Chachamim say that even then, one is obligated
1. Suggestion: This is mid'Oraisa, on account of pain
(d) Rejection: Perhaps Chachamim simply do not expound
(e) Support (that pain to animals is not (forbidden)
mid'Oraisa - Mishnah): If Shimon said, the Mitzvah is
upon you, you can unload it yourself, Reuven is exempt -
1. If pain to animals was mid'Oraisa, whether or not
Shimon helps, Reuven would be obligated!
(f) Rejection: Really, pain to animals is mid'Oraisa;
1. The Mishnah says that Reuven is exempt from
unloading for free - he must unload, but he can
(g) Support (for Rava - Beraisa): One must help with a
Nochri's animal like with a Yisrael's.
2. When Shimon helps, Reuven must unload for free; when
he does not help, Reuven unloads for pay.
1. We understand this if pain to animals is mid'Oraisa
- but if not, what is the reason?
(h) Rejection: It is on account of resentment.
(i) Support (for rejection - Beraisa): If it was carrying
forbidden wine, he is exempt.
1. We understand this if pain to animals is not
mid'Oraisa - but if it is, what is the reason?
(j) Rejection: The Beraisa means, he is exempt from loading
forbidden wine (but he is commanded to unload it).
(k) Question (against Rava - Beraisa): A Nochri's animal
bearing a Yisrael's burden - "v'Chadalta (you refrain)".
1. If pain to animals is mid'Oraisa, he should be
(l) Answer #1: The Beraisa speaks of loading.
1. Question: But the end of the Beraisa says, a
Yisrael's animal bearing a Nochri's burden - ""Azov
Ta'azov (you help)".
(m) Objection: How can we say that the Beraisa speaks of
loading - the verses cited ("v'Chadalta" and "Azov
Ta'azov") are written by unloading!
i. If pain to animals is not mid'Oraisa, he should
2. Answer: He is liable on account of pain to the
3. Question: If so, he should also be obligated in the
beginning of the Beraisa!
4. Answer: The beginning of the Beraisa speaks of a
Nochri donkey-driver, the end speaks of a Yisrael
5. Question: Why does it assume this is the case?
6. Answer: Normally, a person goes with his animal.
(n) Answer #2: Rather, the Tana is R. Yosi ha'Galili, who
says that pain to animals is not mid'Oraisa.
(o) Question (against Rava - Beraisa): If Reuven's friend
needs help unloading and Reuven's Sonei (one he hates)
needs help loading, Reuven helps his Sonei, to overcome
his evil inclination.
1. If pain to animals is mid'Oraisa, unloading should
(p) Answer: No - even though pain to animals is mid'Oraisa,
it is more important to overcome his evil inclination.
(q) Question (Beraisa): When (the Torah) mentions "Sonei", it
means a Yisrael, not a Nochri.
1. If pain to animals is mid'Oraisa, it should make no
(r) Answer: The Beraisa does not refer to "Sonei" written in
the Torah, rather to 'Sonei' in the Beraisa.