(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf

Bava Kama 54

BAVA KAMA 54 (Rosh Hashanah) - dedicated by Rabbi Eli Turkel and his wife. May they be blessed with much Nachas from their children and grandchildren and may all of their prayers be answered l'Tovah!


(a) "ve'Nafal Shamah" is a 'K'lal', and "Shor va'Chamor", a 'P'rat'.
What is the significance of a 'K'lal u'P'rat'?

(b) Then from where do we know that a Bor is liable for any animals other than an ox or a donkey?

(c) So what does the P'rat come to exclude?

(a) Why do we initially think that birds will not be included in the 'K'lal u'P'rat u'Ch'lal'?

(b) On what basis do we initially include birds?

(c) In fact, we reply, we need both Pesukim.
What would we have thought had the Torah written only ...

  1. ... "Shor" and not "Chamor"?
  2. ... "Chamor" and not "Shor"?
(d) How could we learn animals that are not Kadosh bi'Vechorah from "Shor"? Is an ox not Kadosh bi'Vechorah?
(a) What do we now learn (momentarily) from "ve'ha'Meis Yihyeh Lo" (and not from the 'Klal u'P'rat u'Ch'lal')?

(b) In view of this D'rashah, why do the Rabbanan need a Pasuk ("Chamor") to preclude Keilim, and how can Rebbi Yehudah include them (from "O")? Since when do vessels die?

(c) And by the same token, according to Rav, who obligates a Bor for the Havla, why do the Rabbanan need a Pasuk to preclude Keilim, and how can Rebbi Yehudah include them? Do vapors break vessels?

(d) Seeing as both a person and a donkey are incorporated in "ve'ha'Meis Yihyeh Lo", on what grounds do we then preclude ..

  1. ... Keilim from Bor?
  2. ... Adam from Bor?
(a) Why can we not preclude both Adam and Keilim from one D'rashah? Why do we need two?

(b) On what grounds do we reject the current D'rashah from "ve'ha'Meis Yihyeh Lo"? What is wrong with learning it from there?

(a) How do we finally learn that one is liable for birds in a pit from the Pasuk "Kesef Yashiv li'Be'alav"?

(b) This D'rashah ought to include Adam and Keilim, too.
From where do the Rabbanan preclude Adam and Keilim, respectively?

(c) Rebbi Yehudah concedes the D'rashah of "Shor", 've'Lo Adam'.
But what does he learn from "Chamor"?

Answers to questions



(a) Nafal le'Tocho Shor Chashu, Chayav'.
Why can the Tana not mean a Shor belonging to a 'Chashu'?

(b) Rebbi Yochanan therefore concludes that he must mean a Shor that is a 'Chashu'.
What can we extrapolate from this?

(c) How does Rebbi Yirmiyah interpret Rebbi Yochanan? What would we otherwise have thought?

(d) How does Ravina initially establish the Beraisa 'Nafal le'Tocho bar Da'as, Patur'?

(a) Following the previous D'rashah, what is wrong with the inference that Bor is Patur if a ben Da'as falls in, but not if the person who falls in is not a ben Da'as (i.e. a 'Chashu')?

(b) So how do we attempt to explain 'ben Da'as'?

(c) We finally reinterpret the previous Beraisa on the basis of another Beraisa.
What does the Tana there say about a Shor ben Da'as that falls into a pit?

(a) Rava finally echoes Rebbi Yochanan ('Shor she'Hu Chashu ... '), but in disagreement with Rebbi Yirmiyah.
Why does the Tana of our Mishnah specify a Shor which is a 'Chashu', according to him?

(b) What is the reason for this?

(c) How do we know that Rava's explanation is the correct one?

(d) What does the Beraisa say about an ox falling into a pit ...

  1. ... at night or if the ox is blind?
  2. ... when it is healthy and during the day?
(a) What does the Mishnah say about an animal falling into a pit, separating the animals from Har Sinai, paying double for stealing an animal, returning a lost animal or unloading it and muzzling a working animal? What do all of these have in common

(b) In which two other regards are all animals compared to 'Shor'?

(c) Does this comparison extend to wild beasts and birds?

(d) Then why does the Torah refer specifically to "Shor va'Chamor" in all the cases?

(a) From where do we learn that all animals are included in the Chiyuv of Bor?

(b) All animals were included in the command to separate the animals from Har Sinai, from the Pasuk in Yisro "Im *Beheimah* Im Ish Lo Yichyeh".
What do we learn from the Pasuk ...

  1. ... "Zos ha'Beheimah Asher Tocheilu ... Ayal u'Tzvi ... " (Re'ei)?
  2. ... "*Im* Beheimah ... "
  3. ... "Al Kol D'var Pesha" (in connection with paying double for a theft)?
  4. ... "le'Chol Aveidas Achicha"?
(c) We learn the Mitzvos of unloading an animal and not muzzling a working animal from a 'Gezeirah-Shavah' ("Chamor" and "Shor" respectively).
From where do we learn them?

(d) Kil'ayim too, is derived from Shabbos with the Gezeirah-Shavah of "Shor" or "Behemtecha".
Why does Kil'ayim require two 'Gezeirah-Shavahs?

(a) By Shabbos, the Torah specifically includes all animals when it writes in Yisro (in the first set of Aseres ha'Dibros) "Avdecha, va'Amascha u'Vehemtecha". What does Rebbi Yossi in the name of Rebbi Yishmael (in a Beraisa) learn from the fact that, in the second set in Va'eschanan, the Torah writes "ve'Shorcha va'Chamorcha u've'Chol Behemtecha"?

(b) Why do we not then consider "Behemtecha" of the first Dibros to be a 'K'lal', and ''Shorcha va'Chamorcha" of the second Dibros, a 'P'rat', precluding all other species?

(c) Birds whose carcasses (unlike those of oxen and donkeys) are not Metamei, are not automatically included in 'Beheimah'. We reject the original suggestion (to include them in the Isur Melachah on Shabbos on the grounds that either "Shor" or "Chamor is superfluous), because both in fact, are necessary (as we explained on the previous Amud).
So from where *do* we include them?

(d) We query the explanation that "Kol" is (not a 'K'lal', but) a Ribuy (including everything), on the basis of a Beraisa.
What does the Beraisa learn from the Pasuk in Re'ei (in connection with what to purchase with Ma'aser Sheini money) "ve'Nasata ha'Kesef *be'Chol* Asher Te'aveh Nafshecha ('K'lal'), ba'Bakar, u'va'Tzon, u'va'Yayin u'va'Sheichar (Prat), *u've'Chol* Asher Tish'alcha Nafshecha" ('P'rat')?

(a) What does the previous 'K'lal u'P'rat u'Ch'lal' regarding Ma'aser come to exclude?

(b) How do we then reconcile "Kol" being a 'Ribuy' with this Beraisa?

(c) Alternatively, we conclude, "Kol" is normally a 'Klal' (and not a 'Ribuy').
Then why is it a Ribuy here (by Shabbos)?

(d) If, as we just concluded, "Kol" (in the Pasuk in Shabbos) is a 'Ribuy', then why does the Torah need to write "Behemtecha" in the first Dibros, and "Shor" and "Chamor" in the second?

(a) Bearing in mind that a person is certainly forbidden to work on Shabbos, what problem does the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' now present us with?

(b) Papuna'i was the only one who knew how to solve this problem. Who is 'Papuna'i'?

(c) How does Rav Acha bar Ya'akov resolve it from the Pasuk "Lema'an Yanu'ach Shorcha va'Chamorcha"?

Answers to questions

Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,