Bava Kamma 049

11:
Cross-usage. This refers to two specific commands of the Torah. The first is found in Leviticus 19:19:

The second is in Deuteronomy 22:10:

What both these commands have in common is, of course, the prohibition of mixing together two animals that are from different species. In the first case the prohibition is regarding cross-breeding and in the second it is concerned with the differing capabilities of animals from different species. In his commentary on the first of these two verses Rashi states rather lamely that the reason for the command is not known to us, it is one of those 'royal decrees' which must be obeyed even if it is beyond our reason. Typically, Ibn-Ezra will have none of that: he says that the reason for the command is to warn us not to harm animals or to try to change the way God created them. Regarding the second verse Ibn-Ezra says that

Rashi, in his commentary on this verse, explains its connection with our present mishnah:

Not just cattle may not cross-breed but no animal of any species should be made to cross-breed with another of a different species; not just an ox and a donkey should not be yoked together, but any two animals with different capabilities should not be made to share the load.

12:
Shabbat. This, of course, refers to what must be one of the most well-known commands of the Torah. And this command, too, appears twice. The first time it is to be found in Exodus 20:8-10:

The second appearance of this command is in Deuteronomy 5:12-14:

Our present mishnah explains that the command not to work animals on the sabbath day does not apply just to cattle, oxen and donkeys but to all animals and birds in our care.

13:
The last clause of our mishnah seeks to explain the ruling. If these laws of the Torah apply to all animals why were these particular animals specified? The answer is that the Torah legislates for what is usual and common place. In an agricultural and unmechanized society the beasts of burden will almost always be oxen and donkeys. But the law of the Torah applies to any animal in the situations mentioned in each context.

14:
This concludes our study of the fifth chapter of this tractate. God willing, in our next shiur we shall turn our attention to the sixth chapter.

In BK 047 I gave a long response to a query from Jim Feldman. But Jim still has doubts. He writes:

I found your exposition of the issue of trespass on the public way quite interesting, very much on topic and clear, but I believe it to be flawed. You state that there were no police, that the enforcement of law was in the hands of the general public. No argument on that in pre-Davidic time, but even in that time, to extend "no police" to a conclusion that someone digging in the public way was doing so for his own and not the public good is not supportable. Even in a small town, the public way is maintained by people charged to carry out the work. Public projects are a central mark of civilization. David's palace was built as a public project. The First Temple was erected in Solomon's day. I guarantee you that plenty of digging went on in the public way fully a millennium before the drafters of the Talmud put pen to parchment. We even pray to "rebuild the walls of Jerusalem." Are the builders then all trespassers? It doesn't make sense.

I respond:

I am going to make this response as short as possible, even though Jim raises some valid and very interesting points. We are studying Mishnah, which is the early embodiment of the Oral Tradition. This oral tradition expounds the laws of the written Torah. The sages recognized that the civil government, when there was one, would not necessarily observe the commands of the oral tradition but kings and governors would institute their own rules and regulations for the benefit of the good ordering of society. Even when the king egregiously disobeyed the oral tradition he was immune from court proceedings:

This, of course, ultimately applies to all the king's servants. The oral tradition, however, often expounds the Torah according to its own laws, not those of the civil authorities. So we have two separate and different legal and executive systems functioning under the same umbrella. I hope this brief response suffices.

This topic is now closed.