Bava Kamma 98b

בבא קמא צ״ח ע״ב

Learn Bava Kamma 98b step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Bava Kamma 98b in Gemara Clarity

Topic

Burning a שטר and דינא דגרמי; returning stolen items that became forbidden or changed; a craftsman's liability and אומן קונה בשבח כלי

Overview

The amud opens with רבה's ruling that someone who burns another person's שטר is פטור. רבא explains that the case is one where the burner admits what the שטר said. רב דימי בר חנינא ties the ruling to the מחלוקת between רבי שמעון and רבנן about דבר הגורם לממון. רב הונא בריה דרב יהושע objects that רבי שמעון may have meant only items with real value of their own, like stolen חמץ. אמימר then rules that the burner pays the full debt according to the view that holds people liable for דינא דגרמי, and רפרם made רב אשי pay the full amount. Next, the גמרא asks who holds that a robber may return a forbidden item, like חמץ after פסח, saying 'הרי שלך לפניך'. רב חסדא's answer, רבי יעקב, is rejected, and a ברייתא shows that even the רבנן agree. רב פפא settles the case of rotten fruit: if all of it rotted, the robber pays, and if only part rotted, he returns it. A new משנה makes craftsmen pay for damaging items given to them for repair. רב אסי says this applies only to finished items and not to things the craftsman built from raw wood, because אומן קונה בשבח כלי. The גמרא's attempts to prove or disprove רב אסי from the משנה end without a decision, and it begins a new attempt from the case of wool given to a dyer.

Opening lines

The steps (34)

1. ChallengeWhat case is רבה talking about?
2. ResolutionThe burner believes the lender
3. Statementרבה's ruling depends on a famous מחלוקת
4. ChallengeMaybe רבי שמעון only meant items with real value
5. Proofרבה's case of stolen חמץ
6. ChallengeDoes the rule apply to a mere piece of paper?
7. Statementאמימר: The amount depends on whether one holds people liable for indirect damage
8. ConclusionA real case: רפרם makes רב אשי pay the full value
9. QuestionWho holds that a forbidden item can be returned as is?
10. Responseרב חסדא: It is רבי יעקב
11. ProofThe ברייתא about an ox that killed
12. ProofThe argument is about returning a forbidden item
13. Rejectionרבה rejects רב חסדא's reading of the dispute
14. Resolutionרבה gives a new reason for the argument
15. StatementThe רבנן's view: an ox cannot be sentenced in its absence
16. Statementרבי יעקב's view: an ox can be sentenced in its absence
17. Questionרב חסדא asks רבה בר שמואל about forbidden items
18. ResponseThe verse teaches: return the same item you stole
19. ProofList of changed items the robber may return as is
20. ChallengeEven the Rabbis allow returning forbidden חמץ
21. Conclusionרב חסדא admits his mistake
22. ChallengeRotten fruit: the ברייתא against the משנה
23. Resolutionרב פפא: all rotted or only part
24. StatementCraftsmen who damage items they were fixing
25. StatementA builder taking down a wall
26. Statementרב אסי: fixing an existing item vs. building a new one
27. ResponseThe reason behind רב אסי's ruling
28. ChallengeChallenge from the משנה: maybe it means raw wood
29. ResolutionNo, the משנה means finished furniture
30. ChallengeBut the last part implies the first part is wood
31. ResolutionThe last part explains the first part
32. ProofProof that this reading is correct
33. RejectionThe last part of the משנה may be there to show the first part is about raw wood
34. ProofA new attempt to support רב אסי from the case of wool given to a dyer