Bava Kamma 158

שכירות דמטלטלין מטלטלי בני שטרא נינהו אמר רב חסדא שכירות דקרקע:

the hire of movables, are movables transferred by a deed?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Are they not acquired solely by the medium of pulling as stated in Kid. ibid.? ');">¹</span> — Said R. Hisda: The hire of immovable property.

אמר ר' אלעזר ראוהו שהטמין בחורשין וטבח ומכר משלם תשלומי ארבעה וחמשה אמאי הא לא משך א"ר חסדא שהכישה במקל

R. Eleazar stated: If a thief was seen hiding himself in forests [where flocks pasture] and slaughtering or selling [there sheep or oxen], he would have to make four-fold or five-fold payment. But why so, since he did not pull the animal?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The theft never became complete. ');">²</span> — Said R. Hisda: We suppose that he struck it with a stick [and thus drew it towards himself]. But I would still ask, since he was seen doing this [publicly], should he on this account not be [subject to the law applicable to] a robber [who has not to pay any fines]?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For a robber has to restore only the article taken by him or its value. ');">³</span>

אמרי וכיון דראוהו גזלן הוא כיון דקא מטמרי מנייהו גנב הוא

— Since [at the same time] he was hiding himself from the public he is [subject to the law applicable to] a thief.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who is liable to fine. ');">⁴</span> How then would you define a robber? — Said R. Abbahu: One, for instance, like Benaiah the son of Jehoiadah, of whom we read:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' II Sam. XXIII, 21. ');">⁵</span>

ואלא גזלן היכי דמי אמר ר' אבהו כגון בניהו בן יהוידע שנאמר (שמואל ב כג, כא) ויגזל את החנית מיד המצרי ויהרגהו בחניתו

<i>And he plucked the spear out of the Egyptian's hand and slew him with his own spear</i>. R. Johanan said: Like the men of Shechem of whom we read:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Jud. IX, 25. ');">⁶</span> <i>And the men of Shechem set liers in wait for him on the tops of the mountains, and they robbed all that came along that way by them: and it was told Abimelech</i>. Why did R. Abbahu not give his instance from this last source? He could say that since these were hiding themselves they could not be called robbers. And R. Johanan? — He could argue that the reason they were hiding themselves was so that people should not notice them and run away from them.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' But not out of any fear. ');">⁷</span>

ר' יוחנן אמר כגון בעלי שכם שנאמר (שופטים ט, כה) וישימו לו בעלי שכם מארבים על ראשי ההרים ויגזלו [את] כל אשר יעבר עליהם בדרך

The disciples of R. Johanan b. Zakkai asked him why the Torah was more severe on a thief<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That he has to pay double payment for the theft and four-fold and five-fold payments for the subsequent slaughter or sale of the stolen sheep and ox respectively in accordance with Ex. XXI, 37. ');">⁸</span> than on a robber.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who has to pay only the thing misappropriated by him or its value, in accordance with Lev. V, 23. ');">⁹</span>

ור' אבהו מאי טעמא לא אמר מהאי אמר לך כיון דמטמרי איטמורי לא גזלני נינהו ור' יוחנן הא דקא מטמרי דלא ניחזינהו אינשי וניערקו מנייהו

He replied: The latter<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the robber by committing the crime publicly. ');">¹⁰</span> puts the honour of the slave<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., human society. ');">¹¹</span>

שאלו תלמידיו את רבן יוחנן בן זכאי מפני מה החמירה תורה בגנב יותר מגזלן אמר להן זה השוה כבוד עבד לכבוד קונו וזה לא השוה כבוד עבד לכבוד קונו

on the same level as the honour of his owner,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the Creator. ');">¹²</span> whereas the former<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the thief by committing his crime by stealth. ');">¹³</span>

כביכול עשה עין של מטה כאילו אינה רואה ואוזן של מטה כאילו אינה שומעת שנאמר (ישעיהו כט, טו) הוי המעמיקים מה' לסתיר עצה והיה במחשך מעשיהם וגו' וכתיב (תהלים צד, ז) ויאמרו לא יראה יה ולא יבין אלהי יעקב וכתיב (יחזקאל ט, ט) כי [אמרו] עזב ה' את הארץ ואין ה' רואה

does not put the honour of the slave on the same level as the honour of the master [but higher], for, as it were, he acts as if the eye of Below<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Euphemism for 'Heaven'; cf. Ab. II. 1. ');">¹⁴</span> would not be seeing and the ear of Below would not be hearing, as it says: <i>Woe unto them that seek deep to hide their counsel from the Lord, and their works are in the dark, and they say, Who seeth us? and who knoweth us</i>?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Isa. XXIX. 15. ');">¹⁵</span>

(תניא) אמר ר' מאיר משלו משל משום רבן גמליאל למה הדבר דומה לשני בני אדם שהיו בעיר ועשו משתה אחד זימן את בני העיר ולא זימן את בני המלך ואחד לא זימן את בני העיר ולא זימן את בני המלך איזה מהן עונשו מרובה הוי אומר זה שזימן את בני העיר ולא זימן את בני המלך

Or as it is written: <i>And they say, The Lord will not see, neither will the God of Jacob give heed</i>;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ps. XCIV. 7. ');">¹⁶</span> or, as again it is written, <i>For they say, the Lord hath forsaken the earth and the Lord seeth not</i>.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ezek. IX, 9. ');">¹⁷</span>

אמר רבי מאיר בא וראה כמה גדול כח של מלאכה שור שביטלו ממלאכתו חמשה שה שלא ביטלו ממלאכתו ארבעה

It was taught:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [Rashal deletes 'It was taught', as this is the continuation of the preceding passage in Tosef. B.K. VII.] ');">¹⁸</span> R. Meir said: The following parable is reported in the name of R. Gamaliel. What do the thief and the robber resemble? Two people who dwelt in one town and made banquets. One invited the townspeople and did not invite the royal family, the other invited neither the townspeople nor the royal family.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So also in the case of the thief and the robber the former equals the former and the latter the latter; cf. however B.B. 88b. ');">¹⁹</span>

אמר רבן יוחנן בן זכאי בא וראה כמה גדול כבוד הבריות שור שהלך ברגליו חמשה שה שהרכיבו על כתיפו ארבעה:

Which deserves the heavier punishment? Surely the one who invited the townspeople but did not invite the royal family. R. Meir further said: Observe how great is the importance attached to labour, for in the case of an ox [stolen and slaughtered] where the thief interfered with its labour<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For an ox usually labours in the field; cf. Deut. V, 14; Isa. XXX, 24 and Prov. XIV, 4. ');">²⁰</span>

<big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> אין מגדלין בהמה דקה בא"י אבל מגדלין בסוריא ובמדברות של ארץ ישראל

he has to pay five-fold, while in the case of a sheep where he did not disturb it from its labour<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As it is in any case not fit for work. ');">²¹</span> he has to pay only four-fold. R. Johanan b. Zakkai said: Observe how great is the importance attached to the dignity of Man, for in the case of an ox which walks away on its own feet<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' While the thief misappropriates it. ');">²²</span>

אין מגדלין תרנגולין בירושלים מפני הקדשים ולא כהנים בארץ ישראל מפני הטהרות

the payment is five-fold, while in the case of a sheep which was usually carried on the thief's shoulder only four-fold has to be paid.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Mek. on Ex. XXII, 6. ');">²³</span> <b><i>MISHNAH</i></b>. IT IS NOT RIGHT TO BREED SMALL CATTLE<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As these usually spoil the crops of the field. Cf. supra p. 118. ');">²⁴</span>

אין מגדלין חזירין בכל מקום לא יגדל אדם את הכלב אלא אם כן היה קשור בשלשלת אין פורסין נישובים ליונים אלא אם כן היה רחוק מן הישוב ל' ריס:

IN ERETZ YISRAEL.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where the produce of the fields was of public concern. ');">²⁵</span> THEY MAY HOWEVER BE BRED IN SYRIA OR IN THE DESERTS OF ERETZ YISRAEL. IT IS NOT RIGHT TO BREED HENS<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As these usually peck in dunghills and expose impurities. ');">²⁶</span>

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> ת"ר אין מגדלין בהמה דקה בא"י אבל מגדלין בחורשין שבארץ ישראל בסוריא אפילו בישוב ואין צריך לומר בחוצה לארץ

IN JERUSALEM ON ACCOUNT OF THE SACRIFICES,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which are eaten there and might easily be defiled by some impurity brought by the chickens. ');">²⁷</span> NOR MAY PRIESTS DO SO THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE OF ERETZ YISRAEL, ON ACCOUNT OF THEIR FOOD<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Consisting mainly of terumah (v. Glos.). ');">²⁸</span>

תניא אידך אין מגדלין בהמה דקה בארץ ישראל אבל מגדלין במדבר שביהודה ובמדבר שבספר עכו ואף על פי שאמרו אין מגדלין בהמה דקה אבל מגדלין בהמה גסה לפי שאין גוזרין גזרה על הצבור אלא אם כן רוב צבור יכולין לעמוד בה

WHICH HAS TO BE RITUALLY CLEAN.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In accordance with Lev. XXII. 6-7. ');">²⁹</span> IT IS NOT RIGHT TO BREED PIGS IN ANY PLACE WHATEVER.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. Gemara. ');">³⁰</span>

בהמה דקה אפשר להביא מחוצה לארץ בהמה גסה אי אפשר להביא מחוצה לארץ

NO MAN SHOULD BREED A DOG<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As by barking it might frighten pregnant women and cause miscarriages. ');">³¹</span> UNLESS IT IS ON A CHAIN. IT IS NOT RIGHT TO PLACE NETS FOR DOVES UNLESS AT A DISTANCE OF THIRTY <i>RIS</i><span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., four miles, cf. Glos. ');">³²</span>

ואף על פי שאמרו אין מגדלין בהמה דקה אבל משהה הוא קודם לרגל שלשים יום וקודם משתה בנו ל' יום ובלבד שלא ישהה את האחרונה שלשים יום

FROM INHABITED SETTLEMENTS.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So that doves belonging to private owners in the settlement should not be enticed into the nets. ');">³³</span> <b><i>GEMARA</i></b>. Our Rabbis taught: It is not right to breed small cattle in Eretz Yisrael but they may be bred in the woods<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which were considered common property. ');">³⁴</span>

דסד"א דאי נפק ליה רגל ומכי זבנה עד השתא אכתי לא מלו ליה תלתין יומין לא נימא תלתין משרא שרי ליה לשהויי אלא כיון דנפק ליה רגל לא מבעי ליה לשהויי

of Eretz Yisrael or in Syria even in inhabited settlements, and needless to say also outside Eretz Yisrael. Another [Baraitha] taught: 'It is not right to breed small cattle in Eretz Yisrael. They may, however, be bred in the deserts of Judah and in the desert at the border of Acco.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [MS.M.: Kefar Amiko, N. of Acco, v. Klein, NB.p. 9.] ');">³⁵</span> Still though the Sages said: 'It is not right to breed small cattle' it is nevertheless quite proper to breed large cattle, for we should not impose a restriction upon the community unless the majority of the community will be able to stand it. Small cattle could be imported from outside Eretz Yisrael, whereas large cattle could not be imported from outside Eretz Yisrael.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And cattle could not be dispensed with in an agricultural country where they are vital for field work. ');">³⁶</span> Again, though they said: 'It is not right to breed small cattle', one may nevertheless keep them before a festival for thirty days and similarly before the wedding festivity of his son for thirty days. He should, however, not retain the animal last bought for thirty days [if these expire after the festival]. So<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [Following MS.M., which omits 'For you might think' occurring in cur. edd., the whole passage appears to be a copyist's gloss on the cited Baraitha; v. D.S. a.l.] ');">³⁷</span> that if the festival had already gone, though since from the time he bought the animal until that time thirty days had not yet elapsed we do not say that a period of thirty days is permitted for keeping the animal, but [we are to say that] as soon as the festival has gone he should not retain it any longer.