Gemara Clarity

Bava Kamma 65b

בבא קמא ס״ה ע״ב

Learn Bava Kamma 65b step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Bava Kamma 65b in Gemara Clarity

Topic

Valuing theft payments, the חומש and אשם where there is כפל, and whether a stolen animal that grows up counts as changed.

Overview

The amud opens by finishing a ברייתא about a שומר who falsely claimed a deposit was stolen and now owes כפל. רבי יעקב says his חומש is 'covered by' the כפל. The חכמים say there is no חומש where there is כפל, and רבי שמעון בן יוחאי says there is no אשם either. The גמרא first tries to prove רב's rule from רבי יעקב: the קרן follows the value at the theft, while כפל follows the value at the trial. רבא rejects the proof by explaining the case as four false oaths, which create four חומשים. The גמרא then explains why the חכמים still require an אשם, based on how they read 'ואת אשמו' in the פסוק, and how רבי שמעון בן יוחאי reads it differently. Next, רבי אילעא rules that a stolen lamb that grows into a ram has changed, so the thief owns it. רבי חנינא challenges him from a ברייתא, and רבי זירא raises a point about a change of name, which רבא answers. Finally, רב ששת explains that the ברייתא follows בית שמאי, who hold that a change does not transfer ownership, as seen from their view on a changed אתנן. The source for בית שמאי's view continues on the next amud.

Opening lines

וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: ״בְּרֹאשׁוֹ וַחֲמִשִׁתָיו״;

And the Rabbis say: “according to its principal and its fifth”;

מָמוֹן הַמִּשְׁתַּלֵּם בְּרֹאשׁ – מוֹסִיף חוֹמֶשׁ,

money that is paid as the principal – he adds a fifth,

מָמוֹן שֶׁאֵין מִשְׁתַּלֵּם בְּרֹאשׁ – אֵין מוֹסִיף חוֹמֶשׁ.

money that is not paid as the principal – he does not add a fifth.

רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַאי אוֹמֵר:

Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai says:

The steps (33)

  1. StatementThe Sages: only a payment equal to the principal gets an added fifth
  2. Statementרבי שמעון בן יוחאי: no fifth and no guilt-offering where there is double payment
  3. QuestionFocusing on רבי יעקב: what case makes the fifth equal the double payment?
  4. RejectionIt cannot be when the item kept the same value
  5. ResponseIt must be when the item dropped in value
  6. ProofProof: principal follows theft time, double payment follows trial time
  7. Rejectionרבא: the item could have stayed worth four
  8. ResolutionFour separate false oaths
  9. ProofThe Torah allows many fifths on one principal
  10. StatementThe Sages: only money paid by the principal gets a fifth
  11. StatementInference: an אשם is still brought
  12. ChallengeWhy is the guilt offering different from the fifth?
  13. ResolutionThe word 'את' separates the אשם from the חומש
  14. Rejectionרבי שמעון בן יוחאי: the ו joins the פסוק
  15. ChallengeThe חכמים: then why write either one?
  16. Resolution'את' was needed anyway, so the ו joins
  17. StatementA stolen lamb that grows into a ram belongs to the thief
  18. Challengeרבי חנינא challenges רבי אילעא from a ברייתא
  19. Challengeרבי אילעא turns the ברייתא around
  20. Resolutionרבי חנינא explains why the thief pays the old value
  21. RejectionEach sage rejects the other's view
  22. Challengeרבי זירא: the change of name should give ownership
  23. Resolutionרבא: a newborn is already called bull or ram
  24. ProofProof that a newborn bull is called a bull
  25. ProofProof that a newborn ram is called a ram
  26. ChallengeThe original difficulty from the ברייתא still stands
  27. Resolutionרב ששת: the ברייתא follows בית שמאי
  28. ProofTwo ברייתות disagree about a changed אתנן
  29. Resolutionרב יוסף: the ברייתות follow בית שמאי and בית הלל
  30. QuestionWhat is the source for בית שמאי?
  31. ResponseThe word 'even' includes changed items
  32. ResponseThe word 'these' excludes changed items
  33. ResolutionHow בית שמאי deal with the word 'these'