Gemara Clarity

Bava Kamma 75a

בבא קמא ע״ה ע״א

Learn Bava Kamma 75a step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Bava Kamma 75a in Gemara Clarity

Topic

מודה בקנס ואחר כך באו עדים: רבן גמליאל's admission, the dispute of רב and שמואל, and when an admission exempts from a קנס

Overview

The amud opens by finishing the story of רבן גמליאל, who blinded his slave טבי's eye and told רבי יהושע. The גמרא explains that he was not in a בית דין, so his admission did not count. Another version has רבי יהושע say 'you already admitted.' The גמרא explains that the two versions differ only on whether the talk happened in court, not on the law. Then רב and שמואל argue about someone who admits to a קנס and afterward עדים come: רב says פטור, and שמואל says חייב. רב's proof from the פסוקים is turned aside by שמואל. A ברייתא about a thief who admits when he sees עדים coming forces שמואל to say he follows רבי אלעזר ברבי שמעון. רב can fit both תנאים, because a frightened admission is different from a free one. רב המנונא, backed by רבי יוחנן, limits רב's rule to an admission that makes the thief owe something, and רבא challenges this from the רבן גמליאל story. רב אשי begins to bring support from the wording of a משנה, and his proof continues on the next amud.

Opening lines

שֶׁלֹּא בְּבֵית דִּין הֲוָה קָאֵי.

He was standing not in a court.

וְהָתַנְיָא, אָמַר לוֹ:

But it was taught: He said to him:

אֵין בִּדְבָרֶיךָ כְּלוּם, שֶׁכְּבָר הוֹדִיתָ,

There is nothing in your words, because you already admitted.

מַאי, לָאו תַּנָּאֵי הִיא –

What, is it not a dispute of תנאים?

The steps (21)

  1. ResolutionThe admission was not made in court
  2. ChallengeA different ברייתא: 'Because you already admitted'
  3. QuestionSuggestion: the two ברייתות are a dispute between תנאים
  4. RejectionNo: everyone agrees, they only disagree about whether it was in court
  5. Statementרב and שמואל disagree about admitting to a fine before witnesses come
  6. Proofרב's source from the doubled word 'found'
  7. ChallengeWhy is this derivation needed if another verse already teaches it
  8. ProofThe extra verse proves admission exempts even when witnesses come later
  9. Rejectionשמואל: 'הִמָּצֵא תִמָּצֵא' is needed for a different lesson
  10. Challengeרב challenges שמואל from a thief who admits as witnesses approach
  11. Resolutionשמואל: the witnesses turned back
  12. Challengeרב: the end of the ברייתא shows the witnesses did testify
  13. Resolutionשמואל: I hold like רבי אלעזר son of רבי שמעון
  14. QuestionMust רב's view also depend on the מחלוקת of תנאים?
  15. Responseרב can fit even רבי אלעזר ברבי שמעון
  16. Statementרב המנונא: רב's rule works when the admission obligates the קרן
  17. StatementWhen the admission only tries to escape payment, he is חייב
  18. Rejectionרבא challenges רב המנונא from רבן גמליאל
  19. Proofרבי יוחנן teaches the same distinction as רב המנונא
  20. Proofרב אשי brings support from the wording of a משנה
  21. QuestionWhy does the משנה mention two witnesses for the theft?