REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Bava Kama 118
(a) Our Mishnah rules that if Reuven steals from Shimon in an inhabited
area, he cannot force him to accept payment in the desert.
(b) What will be the Din in the equivalent case if he borrowed from him or
received an article for safekeeping?
(c) The Beraisa 's*Milveh Mishtalemes be'Chol Makom*, Aveidah u'Pikadon Ein
Mishtalmin Ela bi'Mekoman' appears to clash with our Mishnah.
Abaye interpret the Beraisa to conform with the Mishnah?
(d) Our Mishnah concludes 'al-M'nas la'Tzeis ba'Midbar, Yachzir Lo
The statement as it stands, is obvious? How do we therefore
establish the Mishnah?
(a) What does the Tana of our Mishnah rule in a case where Reuven ...
(b) If Reuven claims a Manah from Shimon, and Shimon cannot remember
whether he owes him or not, on what grounds do ...
- ... admits to having stolen from Shimon, but he cannot remember whether he paid him back or not?
- ... is not even sure whether he stole from Shimon in the first place?
(c) Even though the latter opinion exempts him from paying, he is
nevertheless obligated to swear (a Shevu'as He'ses - mi'de'Rabbanan).
- ... Rav Huna and Rav Yehudah obligate him to pay?
- ... Rav Nachman and Rebbi Yochanan disagree?
does he swear?
(a) Initially, we establish the Seifa of our Mishnah (where Reuven is not
even sure if he stole ... from Shimon or not, when Shimon claimed from him,
because of the Reisha.
What makes us think that the Reisha (when he admits
to having stolen ... ) must be speaking when Shimon claimed from Reuven?
(b) On whom does this pose a Kashya?
(c) So how do we establish the Mishnah, to conform with Rav Nachman and
(d) Which leading Amora corroborates this interpretation of our Mishnah?
(a) If Reuven returned the sheep that he stole to the pen from which he
stole it, but without informing the owner, the Tana of our Mishnah obligates
the Ganav to pay, should the animal die or is stolen.
(b) Under which circumstances would he nevertheless be Patur?
(c) What does Rav mean when he says 'le'Da'as Tzarich Da'as; she'Lo
le'Da'as, Minyan Poter'? What does Shmuel say?
(d) The ramifications of their Machlokes is spelled out in how they
interpret 'u'Manu es ha'Tzon' in our Mishnah.
How does each one interpret
(a) Rebbi Yochanan is the most lenient of all. He says 'le'Da'as Minyan
Poter' (even if the owner was not informed of the sheep's return).
Answers to questions
will then be the Din if he stole it she'Lo le'Da'as?
(b) To which section of the Mishnah does 'u'Manu es ha'Tzon' pertain,
according to him?
(c) Rav Chisda learns the exact opposite to Rav. Rava explains his reason.
Why is Rav Chisda, in contrast to all the other opinions, more stringent by
she'Lo le'Da'as than by le'Da'as?
(d) According to Rav Chisda, to which section of the Mishnah does 'u'Manu es
(a) What does Rava say about a case where Reuven spotted Shimon stealing a
sheep from his flock and chased him away, but he does not know whether
Shimon returned the sheep or not? Is Shimon liable for O'nes or Geneivah?
(b) How do we establish the case according to Rava?
(c) And how do we reconcile Rav's ruling 'le'Da'as Tzarich Da'as' with
another statement of his 'Hichziro le'Eider she'ba'Midbar Yatza'?
(a) According to Rebbi Yishmael in a Beraisa, someone who steals a lamb from
the flock or a Sela from the purse simply returns it to the location from
where he stole it.
What does Rebbi Akiva say?
(b) We assume that both Tana'im hold like Rebbi Yitzchak, who says that a
person tends to check his purse at regular intervals.
What is then the
basis of their Machlokes in the case of the Sela from the purse?
(c) And assuming that the case of the lamb from the flock speaks when it was
stolen without the owner's knowledge, what is the basis of their Machlokes
(d) Rav Z'vid in the name of Rava however, concludes that even Rebbi
Yishmael holds like the opinion of Rav Chisda. And they argue in the case of
a Shomer who stole the animal from his own Reshus.
Why then, according to
- ... Rebbi Akiva, is he Chayav?
- ... Rebbi Yishmael, is he Patur?
(a) One Beraisa rules that if Reuven stole from Shimon, and repaid him by
slipping extra coins into a payment he subsequently made against something
that he purchased from him, he has fulfilled his obligation of Hashavah.
Another Beraisa rules that he hasn't.
Assuming that both Tana'im hold like
Rebbi Yitzchak, who says that a person tends to check his purse at regular
intervals, what will be the basis of the Machlokes?
(b) They might also be arguing over Rebbi Yitzchak's Din (with which the
first Tana agrees, but not the second). Alternatively, both Tana'im hold
like Rebbi Yitzchak in principle, and the basis of their argument might
depend on where the Ganav placed the money, or on whether there was other
money in the purse.
How will we explain the second Beraisa if it is a
matter of ...
- ... where the Ganav placed the money?
- ... whether there was other money in the purse?
(a) Which commodities does the Tana of our Mishnah prohibit purchasing ...
(b) One is permitted to purchase woolen garments from women in Yehudah
(because that is their specialty, and they sell with their husbands'
- ... from a shepherd?
- ... from a guardian of an orchard?
What may one purchase from them ...
(c) 'be'Sharon' probably refers to an area where calves are reared.
- ... in the Galil?
- ... in the Sharon?
else might it mean?
(d) Under which circumstances may one not purchase any of the above?
(a) What does our Mishnah say about the purchase of eggs and chickens?
(b) And what does the Beraisa say about purchasing goats, kid-goats,
shearings of wool and small strips of wool?
(c) Why does he permit purchasing from a shepherd ...
- ... sewn woolen garments, seeing as they may have been sewn without the owner's consent?
- ... milk and cheese in the desert?
(a) The Tana of the Beraisa also permits the purchase of four or five sheep
and four or five shearings of wool.
What does he prohibit correspondingly?
(b) Rebbi Yehudah has a different criterion.
What is it?
(c) What is the guiding principle behind these Halachos?
(d) According to one opinion, Rav Chisda explains the four or five sheep or
shearings permitted by the Tana to mean four out of five (which is so
blatant that the owner could not fail to notice it.
How do others quote
(a) How do we reconcile the Reisha of the Beraisa, which implies that the
purchase of three sheep is forbidden, with the Seifa, which implies that it
Answers to questions
(b) Rebbi Yehudah permits the purchase of 'home sheep', but forbids 'desert
What are the two possible interpretations of Rebbi Yehudah's
(c) What do we prove from his statement in another Beraisa which permits the
purchase of 'home-sheep' and forbids the purchase of desert-sheep', but
which concludes by permitting the purchase of four or five sheep anywhere?