Bava Basra 66a
בבא בתרא ס״ו ע״א
Bava Batra 66a
Learn Bava Basra 66a step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.
Open Bava Basra 66a in Gemara Clarity
Topic
Does רבי אליעזר treat a vessel attached to the ground as land? The beehive, the baker's board, and the duct that brings water into a מקוה.
Overview
Before this amud, the גמרא asked whose view a ברייתא follows. The ברייתא says a pipe hollowed out and then fixed to the ground stays a כלי, so its water is שאובה and can ruin a מקוה. The גמרא first tried to prove from a beehive משנה that רבי אליעזר treats attached vessels as land. Here it finishes that משנה and hears the חכמים disagree. Then it rejects the proof: רבי אלעזר explains that רבי אליעזר's beehive ruling comes from a special פסוק comparing honey (יערת הדבש) to a forest. The גמרא instead points to רבי אליעזר's ruling that a baker's board fixed into a wall is טהור, and asks again whose view the duct ברייתא follows. It answers that the ברייתא follows רבי אליעזר, because a flat board's טומאה is only rabbinic, so attaching it can cancel it. The amud ends with a challenge to that answer: would it mean that the law of drawn water is from the Torah? This continues on the next amud.
Opening lines
וְאֵינָהּ מְקַבֶּלֶת טוּמְאָה בִּמְקוֹמָהּ,
and it is not susceptible to ritual impurity in its place,
וְהָרוֹדֶה מִמֶּנָּה בְּשַׁבָּת
and one who removes honey from it on Shabbat
– חַיָּיב חַטָּאת.
is liable to bring a sin-offering.
וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: אֵינָהּ כַּקַּרְקַע
But the Rabbis say: it is not like land
The steps (8)
- ProofRest of רבי אליעזר's ruling on the beehive
- ProofThe חכמים disagree: a beehive is not land
- RejectionThe beehive case has its own special reason
- Statementרבי אלעזר: honey is compared to a forest
- ProofThe real source: רבי אליעזר's baker's board
- ChallengeThe duct ruling fits neither side
- ResolutionThe board is different: its טומאה is only rabbinic
- ChallengeDoes this mean drawn water is a Torah law?