Bava Kamma 008
of the Rabbinical Assembly in Israel
RABIN MISHNAH STUDY GROUP
Today's shiur is dedicated by Sherry Fyman
in memory of her mother,
Gertrude Fyman,
Glickle bat Pinchas haLevi z"l,
whose Yahrzeit is today.
TRACTATE BAVA KAMMA, CHAPTER ONE, MISHNAH FOUR (recap):
There are five [kinds of presumed] harmless animals and five [kinds of presumed] vicious animals. Domestic [cattle] are not [presumed to be] vicious for goring, pushing, biting, lying down or kicking. The tooth is [considered to be] vicious for eating suitable food; The foot is [considered to be] vicious for breaking things as it goes on its way; the vicious ox; an ox doing damage in the private property of the wronged person; and human beings. Wolves, lions, bears, panthers, leopards and snakes are all [to be considered] vicious. Rabbi Eli'ezer says that they are not [to be considered] vicious when they have been tamed. Snakes are always [to be considered] vicious. What is the difference between 'harmless' and 'vicious'? – [The owner of] a harmless animals must pay half damages from its body [whereas the owner of] a vicious animal must pay full damages from his living area.
EXPLANATIONS (continued):
10:
In continuation our mishnah lists six animals that must always be considered vicious. That is to say that the owners of these animals cannot claim in defence against damage caused that the animal had never acted viciously before. The owner must always take precautions to see that these animals are kept safely and can cause no harm to other animals – including and especially human animals.
11:
There certainly was a time when most of these animals roamed the countryside of Eretz-Israel freely. Many of them are mentioned in scripture either factually or metaphorically – and the metaphors are such that we must assume that they refer to something with which the reader has personal experience. For instance: when the young David is trying to persuade King Saul to let him fight against Goliath he says:
"Your servant has been tending his father's sheep; when a lion or a bear came and carried off an animal from the flock, I would go after it and fight it and rescue it from its mouth. And if it attacked me, I would seize it by the beard and strike it down and kill it. Your servant has killed both lion and bear; and that uncircumcised Philistine shall end up like one of them, for he has defied the ranks of the living God. God," David went on, "who saved me from lion and bear will also save me from that Philistine." [1 Samuel 17:34-37]
12:
But as the population of Eretz-Israel grew and expanded it is rather unlikely that such wild beasts still roamed the countryside freely. It is much more likely that the list given in our mishnah reflects the assortment of vicious wild animals that the Romans kept for their 'games' in which gladiators would entertain the spectators by fighting against "wolves, lions, bears, panthers, leopards". There can also be no question that Jews were involved in this 'entertainment' to some extent.
13:
One of the most famous of the Amoraïm of Eretz-Israel during the 2nd century CE was Rabbi Shim'on ben-Lakish, who is better known to students of Talmud is Resh Lakish. In his early youth he had studied Torah in the Bet Midrash of Rabbi Yehudah ha-Nasi, the compiler of the Mishnah. But he was very young at the time. Later in life he became so impoverished that he had to sell himself to a gladiator school and he became an accomplished gladiator. One day he saw Rabbi Yoḥanan bathing in the River Jordan and jumped in after him. Rabbi Yoḥanan was so impressed with the man's physique that he offered Resh Lakish the hand of his sister in marriage if he would only return to the study of Torah. The two became great friends and great partners in the study of Torah. One day, many years later
there was a dispute in the Bet Midrash: a sword, knife, dagger, spear, hand-saw and a scythe – at what stage [of their manufacture] can they become [ritually] impure? – [Only]when their manufacture is finished [and not before]. But when is their manufacture finished? Rabbi Yoḥanan ruled, when they are tempered in a furnace but Resh Lakish maintained, when they have been furbished in water. [Rabbi Yoḥanan] quoted to him [the proverb]: "A robber best knows his trade." [Thus he alluded to the other sage's past as a gladiator.]
A rancourous argument between the two developed. Soon afterwards
Resh Lakish died, and Rabbi Yoḥanan was plunged into deep remose. The sages debated, "Who will go to ease his mind? Let Rabbi El'azar ben-Pedat go, whose argumentation is very subtle." So [Rabbi El'azar ben-Pedat] went and sat before him; and on every dictum uttered by Rabbi Yoḥanan he observed: "There is a barayta which supports you." "You are not like Resh Lakish," he complained. "When I stated a law, Resh Lakish used to raise twenty-four objections, to which I gave twenty-four answers, which consequently led to a fuller understanding of the halakhah, whilst [all] you say [is], "A barayta has been taught which supports you." Do I not know that myself!?" Thus he went on tearing his garments and weeping, "Where are you, Resh Lakish, where are you, Resh Lakish?" And he cried thus until he went out of his mind. Thereupon the sages prayed for him, and he died. [BM 84a]
Jewish gladiators knew all about "wolves, lions, bears, panthers and leopards."
14:
Towards the conclusion of our mishnah we find that Rabbi Eli'ezer disagrees with Tanna Kamma. He holds that these animals
are not [to be considered] vicious when they have been tamed, [except] snakes [which] are always [to be considered] vicious.
His opinion is not accepted.
DISCUSSION:
In [BK004] we learned that damages can only be claimed from a Jew.
Ed Frankel writes:
I am puzzled by the requirement that the damaged property be owned by a Jew. It would seem to me that even if initially only Jews would subscribe to Jewish law, if proper restitution were not made to non-Jews, this could lead to great animosity among people living in proximity, and that would be a catastrophe. Further, given the negative way in which the Roman Imperial courts were considered by Jews, would it not have been preferred for non-Jews to be dealt with by batei din, to the degree at least that the non-Jews would accept their jurisdiction and fairness?
I respond:
At no stage in its development has the Jewish halakhic system ever claimed that its jurisdiction extends to non-Jews (except regarding the seven Noahide laws). The Torah was given to Israel and not to the other peoples of the globe. Therefore, it would be grossly unfair to judge a non-Jew according to a legal system to which he is not bound and not required to keep.
NOTICE:
Because of the incidence of the festival of Rosh ha-Shanah the next shiur in this series, God willing, will be on Wednesday 23rd September. May every one of us merit being inscribed for a good life, a life of health and contentment. And may it be God's pleasure that 5770 be in every way better and more successful that this year which soon will come to its end.
"Let this year, with its troubles, end; let a new year begin with its blessings." Amen.
BMV Home and Search Engine |
Bava Kamma Archive |
Subscribe/Unsubscribe
Shiur Dedication |
[What is this?]
Admin @ bmv.org.il is the address for discussion, queries, comments and requests. If your message appears in a shiur it will be attributed to you by name; otherwise please mark your message clearly "not for publication".
There is also a Hebrew version of the Virtual Bet Midrash.
