Bava Kamma 112b

בבא קמא קי״ב ע״ב

Learn Bava Kamma 112b step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Bava Kamma 112b in Gemara Clarity

Topic

Court proceedings without the litigant present: testimony against a minor, hearing witnesses, confirming a שטר, and the steps before an אדרכתא

Overview

The amud opens by finishing רבי ירמיה's case over a field held by a minor whose father had owned it. רבי אבין objects that witnesses cannot testify against a minor, who counts as absent. A ברייתא and סומכוס are debated. רבי אבהו brings a proof from a child who grabbed a field, but the גמרא rejects it, because our minor has his father's חזקה. The גמרא then discusses hearing witnesses without the litigant present: רבי יוחנן allows it only in urgent cases, and שמואל only once the case was opened and the defendant refused to come. רב and רבי יוחנן argue about confirming a שטר without the litigant, and רבא rules that it may be confirmed. The borrower still gets time to bring witnesses, then a ninety-day פתיחא, and only after that an אדרכתא. The אדרכתא covers land only, and the borrower is notified if he is nearby. The amud ends with רבינא's rules about trusting the court's messenger and passing a summons through a woman or neighbors, a limit that continues on the next amud.

Opening lines

The steps (32)

1. ChallengeCan witnesses testify when the minor is not legally present?
2. ChallengeMinors who inherit stolen goods must pay
3. Rejectionסומכוס disagrees with that ruling
4. ChallengeIs everyone following סומכוס just to take my field?
5. Proofרבי אבהו: a child who seizes a field loses it right away
6. RejectionNot comparable: that child had no חזקה from his father
7. Statementרבי שבתאי: witnesses may be accepted without the litigant present
8. Challengeרבי יוחנן is surprised by this ruling
9. ResolutionThe narrow case where witnesses are heard without the defendant
10. Statementשמואל rules that witnesses may be heard without the litigant
11. Statementמר עוקבא explains that שמואל meant an already-opened case
12. ChallengeWhy can't he ask for the High Court even after the case is opened?
13. Resolutionרבינא: the local court has a license from the High Court
14. Statementרב and רבי יוחנן argue about confirming a שטר without the litigant
15. Proofרב ששת explains רבי יוחנן's reason from the ox פסוק
16. Conclusionרבא rules that a document may be confirmed without the litigant
17. StatementGiving the borrower time to bring witnesses
18. StatementThe ninety-day ban and its three waiting periods
19. StatementAfter ninety days the court authorizes collection
20. StatementNo waiting if he says he will not come
21. StatementNo waiting for a deposit
22. StatementThe document is written only on land, not on movable property
23. StatementA suggested exception when the lender owns land
24. RejectionRejected: the lender's land might lose value
25. StatementThe borrower is notified first, but only if he is nearby
26. StatementA distant borrower with a way to be reached: wait twelve months
27. ProofThe case of רבינא and מר אחא supports the twelve-month wait
28. RejectionThe twelve-month wait was a special case
29. StatementThe court's messenger is believed like two witnesses
30. StatementThe messenger is trusted for שמתא but not for פתיחא
31. StatementA court date may be passed on through a woman or neighbors
32. StatementOnly when he is not in town