Bava Kamma 6b
בבא קמא ו׳ ע״ב
Learn Bava Kamma 6b step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.
Open Bava Kamma 6b in Gemara Clarity
Topic
How הצד השוה works (including רבינא's falling wall), the word חב, and the dispute over paying damages from 'the best land'
Overview
This amud first finishes the discussion of what the words הַצַּד הַשָּׁוֶה in the opening משנה come to add. Through a back-and-forth between שור and בור, the גמרא shows that each one answers the other's weakness, so a case can be learned from what they share. רבינא then applies the same method to a wall or tree that falls into the street after בית דין told the owner to take it down. Next the גמרא explains why the משנה uses the short word חב instead of חייב: the תנא was from ירושלים and spoke briefly. It then brings a ברייתא where רבי ישמעאל and רבי עקיבא argue about whose 'best land' the פסוק means when a damager pays. After one explanation is rejected by רבא, רב אחא בר יעקב explains that they argue about whether land quality is measured by the damaged person's land or the damager's, and the גמרא shows how each reads the פסוק. Finally the גמרא asks what רבי עקיבא's קל וחומר for הקדש refers to. It settles on a vow to give money to the בית המקדש and begins to challenge that answer, a challenge that continues on the next amud.
Opening lines
שׁוֹר יוֹכִיחַ!
Ox will prove it!
מָה לְשׁוֹר
What about an ox?
שֶׁכֵּן דַּרְכּוֹ לֵילֵךְ וּלְהַזִּיק.
It is different, because its way is to go and do damage.
בּוֹר תּוֹכִיחַ!
Pit will prove it!
The steps (29)
- ResolutionThe ox category proves the point
- ChallengeBut an ox normally goes and does damage
- ResolutionThe pit category proves the point
- ConclusionThe reasoning comes back around to the common feature
- Statementרבינא: the common feature includes a falling wall or tree
- ChallengeIf the owner gave it up, isn't the fallen wall just a pit?
- ChallengeIf the owner kept it, it is still a pit according to שמואל
- ResolutionA wall or tree is not like a pit, because it was not made to cause damage
- ChallengeThe ox proves that 'not made for damage' does not exempt
- ChallengeAn ox goes out and damages, but a wall does not
- ResolutionPit proves the point, and we go back to what they share
- ChallengeWhy does the משנה say חב instead of חייב?
- ResolutionThe תנא was from ירושלים and spoke briefly
- StatementWhose best land? רבי ישמעאל says the victim's
- Statementרבי עקיבא: the damaged person collects from the best land
- ChallengeHow can he pay for a rich bed if his animal ate a poor one?
- Resolutionרב אידי בר אבין: we don't know which bed was eaten
- Challengeרבא: the one who wants money must bring proof
- ResolutionA new case: the damaged person's best land equals the damager's worst land
- StatementThe dispute: whose land do we measure by?
- QuestionWhat is רבי ישמעאל's source?
- ResponseThe word 'field' at the top and bottom of the פסוק
- Responseרבי עקיבא: 'his field' means the payer's field
- Resolutionרבי ישמעאל keeps both the comparison and the plain verse
- ResponseThe case the plain verse teaches according to רבי ישמעאל
- QuestionWhat is the קל וחומר for הקדש?
- RejectionThe case cannot be an ox that gored a הקדש ox
- ResponseThe case is a vow to give money for the upkeep of the בית המקדש
- ChallengeThe treasurer should be no better than an ordinary creditor