Gemara Clarity

Bava Kamma 53b

בבא קמא נ״ג ע״ב

Learn Bava Kamma 53b step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Bava Kamma 53b in Gemara Clarity

Topic

Shared damages with a disqualified sacred ox, רבא's rules for an ox and a person pushing into a pit, and the exemption for vessels in a pit

Overview

The amud opens with an ordinary ox and a blemished בכור that gore together. The בכור can never be redeemed, so its owner pays nothing, and אביי and רבינא argue about how much the owner of the ordinary ox pays. The גמרא explains their argument through רבנן and רבי נתן, or through the difference between a תם ox and a מועד ox, and it also brings a second version of their argument. Next, רבא teaches that when an ox and a person push something into a pit, each damager pays only the kinds of payment the תורה puts on it. He also rules that the pit owner is exempt for a disqualified sacred animal, learning this from 'והמת יהיה לו.' The גמרא asks how רבא could state this plainly when he once raised it as a question, and answers that he later resolved it. It then explains why the pit verse teaches this exemption while the matching ox verse teaches that the owner keeps the carcass. Finally, the גמרא turns to the משנה's rule that a pit owner is exempt for broken vessels. It shows that רבי יהודה disagrees and starts to ask how the רבנן explain the word 'or' in the פסוק, a question that continues on the next amud.

Opening lines

שׁוֹר וְשׁוֹר פְּסוּלֵי הַמּוּקְדָּשִׁין שֶׁנָּגְחוּ –

An ox and a disqualified consecrated ox that gored together

מַאי נִיהוּ?

What is this case?

שׁוֹר בְּכוֹר,

A firstborn ox,

דְּלָא פָּרֵיק לֵיהּ;

which one does not redeem;

The steps (25)

  1. QuestionThe case: an ordinary ox and a disqualified sacred ox gore together
  2. ResponseIt is a firstborn ox that cannot be redeemed
  3. Statementאביי says half the damage, רבינא says a quarter
  4. ResponseFirst explanation: both speak of a תם ox, following רבנן or רבי נתן
  5. ResponseSecond explanation: both follow רבנן, but תם versus מועד
  6. StatementAnother version: half the damage against full damage
  7. ResponseExplaining the second version: both מועד, רבנן against רבי נתן
  8. ResponseBoth follow רבי נתן, but one speaks of a forewarned ox and one of an ordinary ox
  9. Statementרבא sorts out which damager pays for each type of payment
  10. QuestionWhy is the pit exempt for a disqualified consecrated ox?
  11. ResponseThe verse 'and the dead animal shall be his' exempts the pit
  12. ChallengeWas this really obvious to רבא?
  13. Resolutionרבא asked, then answered his own question
  14. QuestionWhere does רבא learn that the owner keeps the carcass?
  15. ResponseHe learns it from the same words said about an ox
  16. ChallengeWhy not switch the two lessons?
  17. ResolutionThe exemption fits pit, which already exempts vessels
  18. ChallengeBut ox also has an exemption: half damages
  19. ResolutionOx is never fully exempt
  20. StatementQuoting the משנה: an ox and its vessels fall into a pit
  21. StatementThe משנה does not follow רבי יהודה
  22. QuestionWhat is the רבנן's reason?
  23. ResponseThe פסוק says 'ox or donkey', so not a person and not vessels
  24. Responseרבי יהודה reads 'or' as adding vessels
  25. QuestionHow do the רבנן explain the word 'or'?