Insights into Talmudic Law
Delve into Talmudic texts discussing matters of legal responsibility, liability, and ethics. Explore concepts of forewarning, damages, and implications for various scenarios involving oxen. Discover the nuances of Talmudic terminology and the application of ancient laws to practical situations. Gain a deeper understanding of Jewish legal traditions through these thought-provoking discussions.
Download Presentation
Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.
You are allowed to download the files provided on this website for personal or commercial use, subject to the condition that they are used lawfully. All files are the property of their respective owners.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.
E N D
Presentation Transcript
Talmud Leat Bava Kamma 31
Review Which is Tam and which is Mu'ad? Events vs Time R. Yehuda vs R. Meir -> R. Yose vs R. Shimon Three days: Animal vs Owner Three sets of witnesses and hazamah Owner vs Inciter 2 Talmud Le'at - 31
Mishnah 1:4c The Tooth is forewarned to eat that which is fitting for it The Foot is forewarned to break while walking And the forewarned ox And the damager's ox in the victim's domain 3 Talmud Le'at - 31
Mishnah 2:5a ? - , , : , , , , The damager's ox in the victim's domain - What? If it gored, pushed, bit, lay down, or kicked: In the public domain, he pays half damages. In the damaged's premises, Rabbi Tarfon says full damages and the Sages say half damages 4 Talmud Le'at - 31
Mishnah 2:5b : , " , ? Rabbi Tarfon said to them: in a place where it was lenient on the Tooth and on the Foot in the public domain where he is exempt, it is stringent on him in the victim's domain to pay full damages A place where it is stringent with Horn in the public domain to pay half damages Is it not logical that we be stringent on him in the victim's domain to pay full damages? 5 Talmud Le'at - 31
Mishnah 2:5c : : " , They said to him: It is sufficient that it emerges from inference to be like the source: What is in the public domain is half damages, so also in the victim's domain half damages 6 Talmud Le'at - 31
Talmudic Terminology I Kal vehomer Easy and Hard, Light and Heavy "All the more so" If you meet your enemy s ox or his ass going astray, you shall surely bring it back to him again (Exodus 23:4) 7 Talmud Le'at - 31
Talmudic Terminology II Dayo Sufficient But the LORD said to Moses: If her father spat in her face, would she not bear her shame for seven days? Let her be shut out of camp for seven days, and then let her be readmitted (Numbers 12:14) 8 Talmud Le'at - 31
Mishnah 2:5 ; : " , , ? He said to them: I too will not derive Horn from Horn; I will derive Horn from Foot In a place where it was lenient on the Tooth and on the Foot in the public domain, they are stringent with Horn A place where it is stringent on the Tooth and on the Foot in the victim's domain, Is it not logical that we be stringent on him with Horn? 9 Talmud Le'at - 31
Mishnah 2:5 : : " , They said to him: dayo that it emerges from inference to be like the source: What is in the public domain is half damages, so also in the victim's domain half damages 10 Talmud Le'at - 31
Numbers 12:14-15 -- , , , ; - ; . , - . , , , And the LORD said unto Moses: 'If her father had but spit in her face, should she not hide in shame seven days? let her be shut up without the camp seven days, and after that she shall be brought in again.' And Miriam was shut up without the camp seven days; and the people journeyed not till Miriam was brought in again. 11 Talmud Le'at - 31
Bava Kamma 25a ? ! " ? : " : ' ? " " And does R. Tarfon really not hold by the principle of dayo? Why, dayo is from the Torah! It is taught: From the rule of kal vehomer. How so? And the Lord said to Moses, If her father had spit in her face, should she not be ashamed seven days? (Numbers 12:14) Kal vehomer the Divine Presence for fourteen days! Nevertheless, it is dayo for the inferred law to be as the source law 12 Talmud Le'at - 31
Bava Kamma 24b ? " " , When does he not hold by dayo? When it contradicts kal vehomer When it does not contradict kal vehomer, he does hold by dayo 13 Talmud Le'at - 31
Bava Kamma 25a , " ; " " , , , There, the seven of the Divine Presence are not written; kal vehomer comes and brings fourteen, dayo comes and takes away seven and leaves seven But here, half damages are written and kal vehomer comes to another half damages and becomes full damages If you apply dayo, the kal vehomer would be nullified 14 Talmud Le'at - 31
Bava Kamma 25a ? " " : And the rabbis? The seven of the Divine Presence are written: Let her be shut out for seven days (Numbers 12:14) 15 Talmud Le'at - 31
Bava Kamma 25a ? " " " And R. Tarfon? That "shut out should be derived as dayo 16 Talmud Le'at - 31
Bava Kamma 25a ? " " And the rabbis? Another verse is written: And Miriam was shut out (Numbers 12:15) 17 Talmud Le'at - 31
Bava Kamma 25a ? " ' " And R. Tarfon? That even in general we derive dayo and that you should not say here that on account of his honor, but in general not Thus we have learned 18 Talmud Le'at - 31
Bava Kamma 25a , : ? " " , " : : , ? R. Papa said to Abaye: Behold, there is a Tanna who does not employ dayo even when it does not nullify kal vehomer For it was taught: From where is semen of a zav? This is a logical derivation: what is pure from pure person is impure from an impure person Impure from a pure person, is it not logical that impure from an impure person? And he applies this both to contact and carrying 19 Talmud Le'at - 31
Talmud Time-Out - Purities () I Pure/Clean ( ) vs Impure/Unclean ( ) 1) A dead body ("met") 2) Creepy-crawlies ("sheretz") 3) Carcass ("nevelah") 4) Discharges ("zav/zavah", "niddah") 5) Scale disease ("tzara at") 20 Talmud Le'at - 31
Talmud Time-Out - Purities () II Ways In: People Vessels Food & Drink Transmission Contact Carry Ways Out: Immersion ("mikveh") & Time Ashes of the Red Heifer 21 Talmud Le'at - 31
Kelim Mishnah 1:3 1) Above them is one who had intercourse with a menstruant, for he defiles the bottom [bedding] upon which he lies as he does the top [bedding]. Above them is the issue of a zav, his spit, his semen and his urine, and the blood of a menstruant, for they convey impurity both by contact and by carrying. Above them is an object on which one can ride, for it conveys impurity even when it lies under a heavy stone. Above the object on which one can ride is that on which one can lie, for contact is the same as its carrying. Above the object on which one can lie is the zav, for a zav conveys impurity to the object on which he lies, while the object on which he lies cannot convey the same impurity to that upon which it lies. 2) 3) 4) 5) 22 Talmud Le'at - 31
Bava Kamma 25a ? " But why? Let us say that the kal vehomer works for contact, and dayo works to exclude carrying 23 Talmud Le'at - 31
Deuteronomy 23:11 -- - - , , - - - If there be among you any man, that is not clean by reason of that which happened by night, then shall he go abroad out of the camp, he shall not come within the camp 24 Talmud Le'at - 31
Bava Kamma 25a ! , " , " , " " " If you were to say contact does not need kal vehomer, because he is no worse than a pure person, it is necessary! You might think to say it happened at night (Deuteronomy 23:11) is written, one whose emission causes him. Excluded then is one whose emission does not cause him, rather something else has caused him Thus it teach us 25 Talmud Le'at - 31
Bava Kamma 25a ? " , But not another matter, is it written? 26 Talmud Le'at - 31
Bava Kamma 25a ? " : , , Who is the Tanna from whom you heard that semen of a zav defiles by carrying? Neither R. Eliezer, nor R. Joshua, for it was taught: The semen of a zav defiles by contact but it does not defile by carrying, the words of R. Eliezer 27 Talmud Le'at - 31
Bava Kamma 25a , : , , And R. Joshua says: it also defiles by carrying, since it is impossible without particles of zivah Thus far, R. Joshua says there only because it is impossible without particles of zivah If not for this, it is not 28 Talmud Le'at - 31
Bava Kamma 25a , : , , , ; Rather it is this Tanna For it was taught: Above them are the discharge of a zav, his spit, and his semen and his urine, and the blood of a menstruant; they convey impurity both by contact and by carrying 29 Talmud Le'at - 31
Bava Kamma 25b ? " " But perhaps here too because it is impossible without particles of zivah? 30 Talmud Le'at - 31
Bava Kamma 25b " , ? " If this, let him teach it alongside his zivah Why did it teach it alongside his spit? Rather, because it comes from "his spit" 31 Talmud Le'at - 31
