REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Bava Kama 56
BAVA KAMA 56 (Rosh Hashanah) - sponsored by Mr. and Mrs. D. Kornfeld in
prayer that Hashem may accept our prayers, in these days of Rachamim, and
speedily grant Klal Yisrael a true and complete redemption from all of their
enemies, returning His Shechinah to Tziyon and His people to His service!
(a) We learned in the Beraisa that if Reuven bends Shimon's corn into the
path of a fire, he is only liable be'Diynei Shamayim'.
What sort of wind
subsequently carried the fire to the corn, a regular wind or an irregular
(b) According to Rav ashi, the Tana might even be speaking in the case of a
Then why is he not fully liable to pay? What is the case,
according to Rav Ashi?
(c) When the Tana includes Reuven ...
(d) When the Torah writes "ve'Hu Eid ... Im Lo Yagid ve'Nasa Avono", how do
we know that it is referring to two witnesses, and not just to one?
- ... hiring false witnesses in his list, on whose behalf did he hire them?
- ... declining to testify on behalf of Shimon, was there another witness involved or was he the only one?
(a) What do the following cases have in common 'ha'Oseh Melachah be'Mei
Chatas u've'Paras Chatas', 'ha'Nosen Sam ha'Maves Bisfnei Beheimas
Chaveiro', 'ha'Sholei'ach es ha'Be'eiroh be'Yad Chashu', and 'ha'Mav'is es
(b) In 'ha'Oseh Melachah be'Mei Chatas' ...
(c) The Tana of the Beraisa also includes in his list, the case of and
'Nishberah Kado bi'Reshus-ha'Rabim, ve'Lo Silkah ... ', according to the
- ... what sort of Melachah is involved?
- ... why is he Patur mi'Diynei Adam?
What does Rebbi Meir say?
(d) Considering that these five cases are also Chayav be'Diynei Shamayim ...
, why does Rebbi Yehoshua list only the above four?
(a) Why did Rebbi Yehoshua need to list ...
(b) And what might we have thought had he not specifically listed ...
- ... ha'Poretz Geder Bifnei Behemas Chaveiro'? What might we otherwise have thought?
- ... 'ha'Kofef Komaso shel Chaveiro Bifnei ha'Deleikah (regarding a Ru'ach she'Eino Metzuyah)'?
- ... regarding a 'Ru'ach Metzuyah, according to Rav Ashi?
- ... 'ha'Socher Eidei Sheker'?
- ... 'ha'Yodei'a Eidus la'Chaveiro, ve'Eino Me'id Lo'?
(a) We learned in our Mishnah that if the sheep broke out in the night, the
owner is Patur.
How does Rabah establish the case?
(b) We extrapolate from Rabah that if the sheep had not dug under the wall,
he would be liable.
Why can this not be speaking about a strong wall?
(c) What is the problem if we then establish it by a rickety one?
(a) What conclusion are we therefore forced to draw with regard to Rabah? On
which part of the Mishnah did he make his statement?
Answers to questions
(b) Now that Rabah refers to the Seifa 'Hinichah be'Chamah ... ', what is
Rabah coming to teach us? What is the Chidush of Chasrah?
(c) How will we explain this according to those who hold 'Techilaso
bi'Peshi'ah ve'Sofo be'O'nes' is Patur'?
(a) We ask why the Tana of our Mishnah needs to tell us that if the robbers
took the animal from the pen (and from the owner's Reshus), they are liable?
On what basis ought this to be obvious?
(b) We answer this in two ways, one of them, based on a statement by Rabah
Amar Rav Masna Amar Rav.
What did Rav mean when he said 'ha'Ma'amid
Behemas Chaveiro al Kamas Chaveiro, Chayav'?
(c) Abaye reminded Rav Yosef that he had established Rav (and therefore our
What did Rav Yosef say?
(a) Our Mishnah also states that if he handed the sheep to a shepherd, the
shepherd takes his place.
Why can the Tana not be teaching us that it is
the *owner's* place that the shepherd takes?
(b) Then whose place does he take?
(c) This seems to clash with a statement of Rava however.
What did Rava
say about a Shomer who hands over an animal to another Shomer?
(d) Is it correct to say that the first Shomer is only Chayav for theft and
loss, but for O'nes, the second Shomer swears, absolving himself and the
first Shomer from liability?
(a) How does Rava then establish our Mishnah, to reconcile his opinion with
(b) What do others infer from the fact that the Tana says specifically
(c) Is this a clear proof for Rava?
(a) Rabah considers a Shomer Aveidah a Shomer Chinam.
What do we learn from the Pasuk in the Sh'ma "u've'Lechtecha ba'Derech"?
What does Rav Yosef
(b) If Rabah's reason is because the finder gains nothing by looking after
the article, what is Rav Yosef's?
(c) What reason do others attribute to Rav Yosef?
(d) What are the ramifications of the Machlokes?
Answers to questions