Bava Kamma 19b

בבא קמא י״ט ע״ב

Learn Bava Kamma 19b step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Bava Kamma 19b in Gemara Clarity

Topic

Pebbles and tail-swinging, the chicken and the string, and what counts as normal eating (שן)

Overview

This amud covers several topics in animal damages. First, the גמרא finishes a debate about pebbles kicked by an animal (צרורות). It asks whether רבי יוחנן's rule that חצי נזק is paid in every domain covers the public domain, and answers either that רבי זירא retracts or that רבי יוחנן meant only קרן. Next, two sages ask about an animal that does damage by swinging its tail. The answer is that this is normal behavior, unless the swinging is excessive. רב עינא's question about an animal swinging its organ ends in תיקו. The גמרא then explains the משנה about a string on a chicken's leg. It concludes that the משנה is a case where the chicken flung the string. It also shows that רב הונא's rule about an ownerless string tied by a person is a rolling בור. A new משנה on שן teaches that an animal eating food fit for it pays full damage in the damaged person's property. In the public domain the owner pays only for the benefit, and the משנה uses examples from the square and the store. The גמרא's discussion of that משנה explains what counts as normal eating, including רב פפא's cat and dates and רב יהודה's case of the donkey, the bread and the basket.

Opening lines

The steps (37)

1. ChallengeChallenge from רבי יוחנן's rule that half-damage is paid in every domain
2. Resolutionרבי יוחנן meant pebbles that landed on private property
3. ChallengeBut you yourself said the starting place is what counts
4. Resolutionרבי זירא takes back his earlier view
5. ResolutionOr: רבי יוחנן was speaking only about goring
6. QuestionTwo sages ask about an animal swinging its tail
7. ResponseShould the owner hold its tail while walking?
8. ChallengeBy that logic, goring would be exempt too
9. RejectionGoring is unusual; tail-swinging is normal
10. ChallengeIf tail-swinging is normal, what was the question?
11. ResolutionThe question was about excessive swinging
12. Questionרב עינא asks about an animal swinging its organ
13. ConclusionThe question stays unresolved
14. Statementרב הונא limits the משנה about a string on a chicken
15. ChallengeIf the string got tied by itself, who would pay?
16. ChallengeMaybe the chicken's owner pays, but a pit made by an animal is exempt
17. ResolutionThe משנה is about a chicken that flung the string
18. Statementרב הונא's rule about an ownerless string
19. QuestionUnder which damage category is he liable?
20. ResponseIt is a rolling pit
21. Statementמשנה: The tooth is מועד for food that suits the animal
22. Statementמשנה: This applies only in the damaged person's property
23. StatementEven in the public domain, the owner pays for the benefit
24. QuestionHow does paying for the benefit work?
25. ResponseThe square and the store: where you pay benefit and where you pay damage
26. StatementA ברייתא: שן is מועד to eat what is fit for it
27. StatementLess common foods still count as normal eating
28. Statementרב פפא: a cat eating dates or a donkey eating fish pays full damage
29. Statementרב יהודה's ruling on the donkey, the bread and the basket
30. ChallengeWhy only half for the basket?
31. ResolutionIt ate first and broke the basket afterward
32. ChallengeIs eating bread really normal? A ברייתא says half damage
33. ResolutionThe ברייתא is about a wild animal
34. ChallengeBut wild animals normally eat meat
35. ResolutionThe meat was roasted
36. ResolutionAnother answer: the ברייתא is about a deer
37. ResolutionAnother answer: a domestic animal eating off the table