Talmudic Studies on Maveh, Ox, Fire, and Injury
Talmudic discussions on the concept of Maveh, with references to Ox, Fire, and other causes of injury. The text delves into interpretations of biblical verses, logical arguments, and Talmudic terminology. Discover the complexities of ancient Jewish jurisprudence through this detailed analysis.
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
Review What is Maveh? Rav Human Shmuel Tooth Maveh & Ox Horn, Foot, Tooth Kal v'Homer - "lenient and strict" "all the more so" Reisha & Seifa Talmud Le'at - 07 2
Bava Kamma 4b : , ? ! R. Mari raised a difficulty: Say that Maveh refers to water, as it is written, "As when fire ignites brushwood; fire boils water" (Isaiah 64:1)? Is it written, "Water boils"? It is written, "Fire boils! , " " Talmud Le'at - 07 3
Talmudic Terminology - attacks; raises a difficulty This expression introduces a difficulty that is usually based on a logical argument. In most cases, it is an Amora attacking another Amora Talmud Le'at - 07 4
Bava Kamma 4b : " " " , "? R. Zevid raised a difficulty: Say that Maveh refers to Fire, for when it is written "tiveh", it is in reference to Fire. If so, what is then the explanation of "the Maveh and the Fire "? Talmud Le'at - 07 5
Mishnah 1:1 : , , , There are four primary causes of injury: the Ox and the Pit and the Maveh and the Fire. Talmud Le'at - 07 6
Bava Kamma 4b ? , " "? ? ? And if you say that the latter interprets the former, then instead of "four" there are "three"? And if you say that Ox constitutes two, then what does it mean "nor are either of them in which there is life?" Is there any life in fire? And furthermore, what does it mean "like fire"? Talmud Le'at - 07 7
Bava Kamma 4b , - : , , ; , , , , R. Oshaya taught: There are thirteen primary categories of damage: The Unpaid Guardian and the Borrower, the Paid Guardian and the Hirer; Damage, Pain, Healing, Loss of Time at Work, Embarrassment and the Four enumerated in the Mishnah, thus making thirteen. Talmud Le'at - 07 8
Bava Kamma 4b ? " : : , And the Tanna, for what reason did he not teach these? This is reasonable for Shmuel: damage to property is spoken of, damage to one's self is not spoken of. But according to Rav let it teach: It taught Man and all damages by Man. Talmud Le'at - 07 9
Bava Kamma 4b ? , , : ' But to R. Oshaya, doesn't it also teach Man? There are two kinds of damage from Man: It taught Man damaging people, and it taught Man damaging oxen. Talmud Le'at - 07 10
Bava Kamma 4b , If so, Ox should also be taught twice, as two kinds of damage could result also from the Ox: An Ox that damages another ox and an Ox that damages a person. Talmud Le'at - 07 11
Bava Kamma 4b ; , , ? , , . , How now? It is reasonable, for when Man damages an ox, he pays only for damages; Man damages a person, he may also have to pay four other kinds. But Ox, what does it matter whether it damages an ox or a person, for in both cases he pays only damages. Talmud Le'at - 07 12
Bava Kamma 4b , , ? , But are not the Unpaid Guardian and the Borrower, the Paid Guardian and the Hirer, a Man damaging an Ox and he taught them? He taught direct damages and he taught indirect damages. Talmud Le'at - 07 13
Bava Kamma 4b : : ' R. Hiyya taught: There are twenty-four primary damages: Double Payment, Fourfold or Fivefold Payment, Theft, Robbery, False Witnesses, Rape, Seduction, Slander, Defilement, One who mixes terumah with non-sacred produce, One who libates, and these thirteen; these are twenty-four. ; Talmud Le'at - 07 14
Exodus 22:2-3 DOUBLE If the sun be risen upon him, there shall be bloodguiltiness for him--he shall make restitution; if he has nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft. If the theft be found in his hand alive, whether it be ox, or ass, or sheep, he shall pay double. Talmud Le'at - 07 15
Exodus 21:37 FOUR OR FIVE If a man steal an ox, or a sheep, and kill it, or sell it, he shall pay five oxen for an ox, and four sheep for a sheep. Talmud Le'at - 07 16
Exodus 22:3 THEFT If the theft be found in his hand, whether it be ox, or ass, or sheep, he shall pay double. Talmud Le'at - 07 17
Leviticus 5:23 ROBBERY then it shall be, if he has sinned, and is guilty, that he shall restore that which he took by robbery Talmud Le'at - 07 18
Deuteronomy 19:16-19 FALSE WITNESS If a man appears against another to testify maliciously and gives false testimony against him, the two parties to the dispute shall appear before the LORD, before the priests or magistrates in authority at the time, and the magistrates shall make a thorough investigation. If the man who testified is a false witness, if he has testified falsely against his fellow, you shall do to him as he schemed to do to his fellow. Thus you will sweep out evil from your midst; Talmud Le'at - 07 19
Deuteronomy 22:28-29 RAPE/SEDUCTION If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, that is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife, because he hath humbled her; he may not put her away all his days. Talmud Le'at - 07 20
Deuteronomy 22:19 SLANDER And they shall fine him a hundred shekels of silver, and give them unto the father of the damsel, because he has brought up an evil name upon a virgin of Israel TERUMAH LIBATION Talmud Le'at - 07 21
Bava Kamma 4b ? , And R. Oshaya, what is the reason he did not teach these? He speaks of compensation, not of penalties. Talmud Le'at - 07 22
Bava Kamma 4b Theft and Robbery which involve compensation, let him teach. He taught these in the Unpaid Guardian and the Borrower. Talmud Le'at - 07 23
Bava Kamma 4b ? , But R. Hiyya did he not already teach the Unpaid Guardian and Borrower? He taught both money that came to hand permissibly and that which came to hand illegally. Talmud Le'at - 07 24
Bava Kamma 5a " False Witnesses, who are liable to pay compensation, let him teach He holds like R. Akiva, who maintains that False Witnesses do not pay based on their own confession. Talmud Le'at - 07 25
Bava Kamma 5a " , " But if he holds like R. Akiva, let him teach two types of damages by an Ox: Ox damaging ox and Ox injuring people, for we learned: R. Akiva said: also a Tam injured a person, he pays the addition over full damages. Talmud Le'at - 07 26
Bava Kamma 5a " : " R. Akiva has broken his fist, as it was taught: R. Akiva said: It might have been also a Tam that injured a person, he must pay from the best of his property; Scripture says, "it shall be done to him" (Exodus 21:31); that he pays from the body and he does not pay from the best of his property. "; " Talmud Le'at - 07 27
Bava Kamma 5a , ? . , . , . , , ! . ? Rape and Seduction and Slander, which are also compensation, let him teach What do you think? If for damage, he already taught this; if for pain, he already taught this; if for embarrassment, he already taught this; if depreciation, this is damage. What else then can you say? These are penalties. Penalties, he was not speaking of. Talmud Le'at - 07 28
Bava Kamma 5a , ? , . , Defilement, Mixing Terumah and Non-Sacred Produce and Libating wine, which are also compensation, let him teach What do you think? If unrecognizable damage is damage, he already taught damage; if unrecognizable damage is not damage, then this is a penalty, and penalties are not spoken of. Talmud Le'at - 07 29
Bava Kamma 5a ' Shall we say that R. Hiyya considers unrecognizable damage not to be damage? For if it is damage, he already taught damage. He taught damage that is recognizable and damage that is not recognizable. Talmud Le'at - 07 30
