Gemara Clarity

Bava Kamma 15a

בבא קמא ט״ו ע״א

Learn Bava Kamma 15a step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Bava Kamma 15a in Gemara Clarity

Topic

Witnesses and women in the laws of damages, and whether half-damage (פלגא נזקא) is compensation or a fine

Overview

The גמרא first explains two phrases in the משנה about who may be a witness: 'בני חורין' excludes עבדים and 'בני ברית' excludes גוים, and both phrases are needed. Next it brings three פסוקים showing that a woman is equal to a man in punishments, in civil laws, and in killings, and it explains why each פסוק is needed. Then it turns to the משנה's phrase that the ניזק and the מזיק both share in the payment. רב פפא says the half payment for a תם ox (פלגא נזקא) is ממונא, real compensation. רב הונא בריה דרב יהושע says it is קנסא, a fine, and the גמרא explains the reasoning behind each view. The משנה's phrase seems to fit only ממונא, but the גמרא answers that it refers to פחת נבילה. It then explains why פחת נבילה is taught twice, once for a תם and once for a מועד. Finally, a challenge from the list of differences between a תם and a מועד is defended with 'תנא ושייר', but that defense falls, and a new proof begins that continues on the next amud.

Opening lines

״בְּנֵי חוֹרִין וּבְנֵי בְרִית״.

"Free men and members of the covenant."

״בְּנֵי חוֹרִין״ – לְמַעוֹטֵי עֲבָדִים,

"Free men": to exclude slaves,

״בְּנֵי בְרִית״ – לְמַעוֹטֵי גּוֹיִם.

"Members of the covenant": to exclude gentiles.

וּצְרִיכָא;

And it is necessary [to state both];

The steps (26)

  1. StatementExplaining 'free men' and 'members of the covenant'
  2. StatementWhy both exclusions are needed
  3. QuestionWhere do we learn that women are included in damages?
  4. ResponseA woman is equal to a man for all Torah punishments
  5. ResponseSecond source: women and men are equal in all civil laws
  6. ResponseThird source: a woman's death is treated like a man's
  7. StatementWhy the atonement source alone would not be enough
  8. StatementWhy the civil-law source alone would not be enough
  9. StatementThe first two sources would not teach the case of killing
  10. ConclusionThe killing source alone would not teach the other two, so all are needed
  11. StatementReturning to the משנה: the injured party and the damager share the payment
  12. StatementIs half-damage regular payment or a fine?
  13. StatementWhy רב פפא calls half-damage real compensation
  14. StatementWhy רב הונא calls half-damage a fine
  15. ChallengeChallenge from the משנה: how does the injured party share in paying?
  16. ResolutionAnswer: the injured party absorbs the drop in the carcass's value
  17. ChallengeThe carcass loss was already taught earlier
  18. ResolutionOne mention is for a תם, one for a מועד
  19. ResolutionWhy both cases are needed
  20. ProofA new proof from the difference between תם and מועד
  21. ChallengeWhy doesn't the list include paying by admission?
  22. ResolutionThe תנא taught some cases and left some out
  23. ChallengeWhat else was left out?
  24. ResolutionHalf ransom was also left out
  25. RejectionHalf ransom is not missing according to רבי יוסי הגלילי
  26. ProofCome and hear: a new proof is introduced