REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Bava Kama 26
(a) What leads us to suggest that Shen va'Regel in the Reshus ha'Nizak
should only pay Chatzi Nezek, like Keren?
(b) How do we refute this suggestion on the basis of the Pasuk "Meitav
Sadeihu u'Meitav Karmo *Yeshalem*"?
(c) How does Rebbi Yochanan extrapolate from the word "Yechetzun" that Keren
is liable in the Reshus ha'Rabim?
(d) What would we otherwise have thought?
(a) We ask why Adam does not pay Kofer (in the event that he kills someone).
What makes us believe that he should?
(b) But how can he pay Kofer, when he is already Chayav Miysah or Galus? Why
should the principle 'Kam Lei bi'de'Rabah Minei' not apply?
(c) How do we refute this suggestion based on the Pasuk (written in
connection with Kofer) "ke'Chol Asher Yushas *Alav*"?
(d) And what do we then learn from the Pasuk "*Ish* Ki Yiten Mum ba'Amiso*"?
Why would we have thought otherwise?
(a) We ask whether an animal that unintentionally tramples on a baby and
kills it is liable to pay Kofer.
What are the two sides to the She'eilah?
Why might the owner be ...
(b) What does Rebbi Tarfon in a Beraisa say about Reuven, whose Tam ox
enters Shimon's Chatzer without permission and gores and kills him?
- ... liable?
- ... exempt?
(c) We assume that Rebbi Tarfon holds like Rebbi Yossi Hagelili.
Rebbi Yossi Hagelili say about a Tam that gores someone in the Reshus
(d) What do we now prove from here? From where does Rebbi Tarfon learn that
the same ox will pay full Kofer in the Reshus ha'Nizak?
(a) Rav Shimi from Neherda'a tries to repudiate this proof. He claims that
it is not from a 'Kal va'Chomer' from Regel that Rebbi Tarfon learns that
Keren pays full damages for Kofer in the Reshus ha'Nizak.
Then from where
does he propose Rebbi Tarfon learns it?
(b) On what grounds do we refute Rav Shimi's proposal to learn the Din of
Kofer from Nizakin of ...
(c) So we Rebbi Tarfon can only have learned his Din from Kofer of Regel.
Rav Acha mi'Difta proves that in any event, he must hold 'Yesh Kofer
- ... Regel?
- ... Tamun be'Regel (which is exempt by Eish)?
- ... Keilim (which are exempt by Bor)?
- ... Keilim Temunim (which are exempt by Bor)?
What Pircha would we have asked had he held 'Ein Kofer
be'Regel', and learned his Din from Nezikin de'Regel?
(a) A person is always Mu'ad, even if he damages be'Shogeg.
Answers to questions
Will this hold
true even if he damages in his sleep?
(b) Based on the fact that 'Shiber es ha'Keilim' in our Mishnah is speaking
be'Shogeg, what do we learn from the Tana in our Mishnah's juxtapositioning
of 'Sima es Ein Chavero' to 'Shiber es ha'Keilim'?
(a) What do Chizkiyah and Tana de'Bei Chizkiyah learn from "Petza Tachas
(b) What other D'rashah do we learn from the same words?
(c) If not for this Pasuk, how would we establish the Din of Tza'ar which
the Torah already obligates?
(d) How can we learn two D'rashos from the same words?
(a) If someone stands up, and a stone of which he is unaware falls from his
clothes and damages someone's property, Rabah rules that he is liable, as we
just learned from "Petza Tachas Patza".
Is he also liable to pay all five
(b) Why is he not Chayav if the stone rolls four Amos on Shabbos?
(c) What do we learn from the Pasuk (in connection with Galus for killing
be'Shogeg) "Makeh Nefesh bi'Shegagah"?
(a) If the stone falls on his Eved, knocking out his eye or his tooth, it
will depend on the opinions of Raban Shimon ben Gamliel and the Rabbanan
whether the Eved goes free or not.
What do the Rabbanan say about a master
who complying with his Eved's request, begins painting his Eved's eye or
scraping his tooth, but who blinds him or extracts his tooth in the process?
(b) What does Raban Shimon ben Gamliel say? What does he learn from the
(c) Which of the above Dinim will change in a case where he was initially
aware of the stone, but eventually forgot that it was there?
(a) If he intended to throw the stone two Amos, but it traveled four, the
Din remains the same with regard to all the other areas of Halachah.
does Rabah say with regard to Galus?
(b) What he might have meant is that the Torah comes to preclude this case
from Meizid. It is included in Shogeg, and he must run into Galus.
else might 'P'rat le'Niskaven ... ' mean?
(c) If he intended to throw the stone four Amos, but it traveled eight, the
Din remains unaltered regarding Nizakin, the four things, and Eved.
will be the Din with regard to ...
(d) Regarding the Din of Shabbos, what is then the difference between where
he intended to throw the stone two Amos and it traveled four to where he
intended to throw it four Amos and it traveled eight?
- ... Galus?
- ... Shabbos?
(a) What does Rabah rule in a case where Reuven threw his vessel from the
roof and Shimon broke it with a stick before it landed? Is Shimon liable?
Answers to questions
(b) And what does he say in a case where Reuven threw Shimon's vessel from
the roof and ...
(c) In a case where Reuven threw a baby from the roof and Shimon caught him
on his sword, Rabah connects this with a Machlokes between Rebbi Yehudah ben
Beseira and the Rabbanan. The Rabbanan in a Beraisa, hold that if ten men
beat a man to death, they are all Patur.
- ... Levi came and removed the cushions on which it was due to land, causing it to break upon landing?
- ... Reuven himself removed the cushions?
What does Rebbi Yehudah ben
(d) From which Pasuk do the Rabanan learn their Din?