Gemara Clarity

Bava Kamma 78b

בבא קמא ע״ח ע״ב

Learn Bava Kamma 78b step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Bava Kamma 78b in Gemara Clarity

Topic

What a thief owes for a stolen animal, and when a partial sale or flawed slaughter exempts him from ארבעה וחמשה

Overview

The amud opens with the last words of the previous discussion, which tie רבא's rule about an animal's father to the view of רבי שמעון. Then רבא asks what a thief owes if he steals a bull that was set aside for a general vow of an עולה. רבא answers his own question: the thief only owes the smallest valid עולה, a sheep according to the רבנן or a bird according to רבי אלעזר בן עזריה. A new משנה lists cases where a thief pays only כפל and not ארבעה וחמשה, such as selling all but a small part of the animal or slaughtering it improperly. The גמרא asks which held-back part counts. רב and לוי disagree, and the גמרא traces four different views among the תנאים to different readings of וּטְבָחוֹ וּמְכָרוֹ. Next, a ברייתא about partners who steal raises a contradiction, which רב נחמן finally resolves by asking whether one partner slaughtered with the other's consent. רבי ירמיה and רב פפא then ask about other kinds of holding back, such as keeping the fetus or cutting off a limb before the sale, and these questions end in תיקו. The amud closes with a new ברייתא about a thief who has someone else slaughter or sell the animal for him, and it continues on the next amud.

Opening lines

דְּאִיעַבַּר מִקָּלוּט,

where it became pregnant from a non-cloven animal,

כְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן.

in accordance with Rabbi Shimon.

בָּעֵי רָבָא:

Rava asked:

״הֲרֵי עָלַי עוֹלָה״,

"It is upon me to bring a burnt-offering,"

The steps (34)

  1. ResponseClosing the previous discussion: a case of a non-cloven father
  2. Questionרבא asks: what must a thief repay for a stolen bull vowed as a burnt-offering?
  3. StatementThe משנה behind the two opinions
  4. QuestionThe two sides: just the title of a burnt-offering, or the best way to do the מצוה?
  5. Responseרבא answers his own question: the minimum offering is enough
  6. Statementרבא's ruling taught as a plain statement
  7. StatementNew משנה: cases that pay only double, not four or five
  8. QuestionWhat counts as 'one hundredth'?
  9. Responseרב: a part permitted through slaughter
  10. Responseלוי: even the fleece, with a supporting ברייתא
  11. ChallengeA baraita challenges רב
  12. ChallengeThe challenging teaching finishes with two more opinions
  13. Challengeלוי has a source, but whom does רב follow?
  14. Resolutionרב follows a different teaching of רבי שמעון בן אלעזר
  15. QuestionWhat is the root of the disagreement?
  16. ResponseThe first opinion: the whole animal must be slaughtered or sold
  17. Responseרבי: only parts affected by slaughter count
  18. Responseרבי שמעון בן אלעזר: horn counts, fleece does not
  19. ResponseThe other version of רבי שמעון בן אלעזר: only legs count
  20. ChallengeThe two reports of רבי שמעון בן אלעזר clash
  21. ResolutionTwo teachers reported his view differently
  22. StatementA ברייתא on damaged animals and partners
  23. ChallengeAnother ברייתא says partners who steal are liable
  24. Resolutionרב נחמן splits the two cases
  25. Challengeרבא objects from a ברייתא on "and slaughters it"
  26. Resolutionרב נחמן's new answer: slaughtering with or without the partner's knowledge
  27. Questionרבי ירמיה asks about selling a stolen animal while holding something back
  28. QuestionNarrowing the fetus question to one opinion
  29. QuestionAnother way to frame the fetus question
  30. ConclusionThe questions stay unresolved
  31. Questionרב פפא asks about a thief who cut off a limb and then sold the animal
  32. QuestionThe two sides of רב פפא's question
  33. Conclusionרב פפא's question is left unanswered
  34. StatementA ברייתא about a thief who has someone else slaughter or sell the animal