Gemara Clarity

Bava Kamma 3a

בבא קמא ג׳ ע״א

Learn Bava Kamma 3a step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Bava Kamma 3a in Gemara Clarity

Topic

The sources for שן and רגל in the פסוק, and the search for רב פפא's תולדות that are not like their אב.

Overview

The amud begins by checking the ברייתא's proofs that "וְשִׁלַּח" means רגל and "וּבִעֵר" means שן. Each proof turns out to be needed: without it, we might have read both words as two cases of the same damage. Once each word has its own category, the גמרא compares them, so each teaches the other a detail. שן counts even when the item is not fully destroyed, and רגל counts even when the animal went by itself. The גמרא then asks why the תורה did not write only "וְשִׁלַּח", since the root שלח is used for both feet and teeth. The final answer is that "וּבִעֵר" teaches liability even when the animal was not sent. Next the גמרא looks for רב פפא's תולדות that are not like their אב. The תולדות of שן and of רגל turn out to share their אב's features. So the search moves to בור: first a nine-טפחים pit, which is rejected, then a stone, knife or load left in רשות הרבים. The amud ends as the גמרא starts asking exactly what case that is, and the discussion continues on the next amud.

Opening lines

הַגָּלָל עַד תֻּמּוֹ״.

the dung, until it is all gone."

אָמַר מָר:

The Master said:

״וְשִׁלַּח״ זוֹ הָרֶגֶל,

"And he sends forth" — this is the foot,

וְכֵן הוּא אוֹמֵר:

and so it says:

The steps (29)

  1. ProofFinishing the verse that proves 'ובער' means eating
  2. Statement'And he sends forth' means trampling with the foot
  3. ChallengeWhy is a proof needed? Goring and eating are already written
  4. ResolutionThe proof was needed: we might have read both words as eating
  5. QuestionWhere do we learn שן when the item is not fully destroyed?
  6. Responseשן is compared to רגל
  7. StatementRe-quoting the proof that 'and it consumed' means שן
  8. ChallengeWhy is a proof needed for 'and it consumed'?
  9. ResolutionWithout the proof, both words might have meant רגל
  10. QuestionWhere do we learn רגל when the animal went on its own?
  11. Responseרגל is compared to שן
  12. ChallengeWhy not write only וְשִׁלַּח, which means both?
  13. ResolutionWith one word we would think it meant only one of them
  14. ChallengeIf both readings are equal, include both
  15. ResolutionThe extra word teaches liability even when the animal went on its own
  16. QuestionWhat is a sub-category of שן?
  17. ResponseRubbing or messing things for its own pleasure
  18. ChallengeThe sub-categories of שן share all its features
  19. ConclusionThe תולדות of שן are like שן; רב פפא meant רגל
  20. QuestionWhat is a sub-category of רגל?
  21. ResponseDamage by the body, hair, or gear while walking
  22. ChallengeThe תולדות of רגל have the same features as רגל
  23. Conclusionתולדות of רגל are like רגל, so רב פפא meant בור
  24. QuestionWhat is a תולדה of בור?
  25. ChallengeA ten-versus-nine split is rejected because the תורה gives no numbers
  26. ResolutionThe תורה speaks of a dead animal, and only ten טפחים kills
  27. ChallengeThen each pit is its own main category
  28. Resolutionרב פפא meant a stone, knife, or load left in the street
  29. ChallengeIf the objects were made ownerless, they are just like a pit