Bava Kamma 233:1

אי דינא אי קנסא א"ל אי דינא גמרינן מיניה אי קנסא לא גמרינן מיניה

whether it is a judgment or a fine?' — He replied: If it is a judgment we may derive other cases from it,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By means of analogy. ');">¹</span> whereas if it is a fine<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Imposed for that particular occasion on account of some aggravation of the offence; cf., e.g., supra p. 561. ');">²</span>

ומנא תימרא דמקנסא לא גמרינן דתניא בראשונה היו אומרים המטמא והמנסך חזרו לומר אף המדמע

we would be unable to derive other cases from it. But what is your ground for saying that from a matter of [mere] fine we cannot derive any other case? — As it was taught: 'Originally it was said that [liability will attach] for defiling [<i>terumah</i>]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos. ');">³</span> or for vitiating [wine],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. supra p. 14. ');">⁴</span>

חזרו אין לא חזרו לא מאי טעמא לאו משום דקנסא הוא וקנסא לא גמרינן מיניה

but it was subsequently laid down that [it will also attach] for mixing<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. supra p. 14. ');">⁴</span> [common grain with <i>terumah</i> grain].'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Git. 53a. ');">⁵</span>

לא מעיקרא סברי להפסד מרובה חששו להפסד מועט לא חששו ולבסוף סברי להפסד מועט נמי חששו

Now, this is so only because it was so laid down subsequently, whereas had it not been so laid down subsequently this would not have been so. Is the reason for this not because liability here is a [matter of mere] fine, [thus proving that] we cannot derive anything from a fine?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For if not so, why was it necessary to state explicit liability to the new case. ');">⁶</span> — No, originally it was thought<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'maintained'. ');">⁷</span>

איני והא תני אבוה דרבי אבין בראשונה היו אומרים המטמא והמדמע חזרו לומר אף המנסך חזרו אין לא חזרו לא

that it is only where a great loss<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Such as defiling terumah, vitiating wine and the like. ');">⁸</span> is involved that we have to be on our guard,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And impose a penalty for preventive purposes. ');">⁹</span>

מאי טעמא לאו משום דלא גמרינן מקנסא

whereas where only a small loss<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Such as in the case of mixing, [where the loss is small, as the mixture can still be sold to priests though at a somewhat reduced price]. ');">¹⁰</span> is involved, we need not be particular, whereas subsequently it was decided that even in the case of a small loss<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Such as in the case of mixing, [where the loss is small, as the mixture can still be sold to priests though at a somewhat reduced price]. ');">¹⁰</span>

לא מעיקרא סברי כרבי אבין ולבסוף סברי כרבי ירמיה

we should be particular. But this is not so!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That the law in another case could be derived from a ruling merely imposing a fine. ');">¹¹</span> For the father of R. Abin<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Sanh. 51b. ');">¹²</span>

מעיקרא סברי כרבי אבין דאמר רבי אבין זרק חץ מתחילת ארבע ולבסוף ארבע וקרע שיראין בהליכתו פטור שהרי עקירה צורך הנחה היא ומתחייב בנפשו

learnt: Originally it was said that [liability will attach] for defiling [<i>terumah</i>] or for mixing<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. Git. 53a. ');">¹³</span> [it with unconsecrated grain], but it was subsequently laid down that it will also attach for vitiating [wine]. Now, this is so [only] because it was so laid down subsequently, whereas had it not been so stated subsequently this would not have been so. Is the reason for this not because we are unable to derive anything from a matter of mere fine? — No: originally the view of R. Abin was taken,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'maintained'. ');">⁷</span>

ולבסוף סברי כר' ירמיה דא"ר ירמיה משעת הגבהה קנייה איחייב ליה ממון מתחייב בנפשו לא הוי עד שעת ניסוך

but subsequently the view of R. Jeremiah was adopted. 'Originally the view of R. Abin was taken,' — for R. Abin said: If one shot an arrow<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In a public thoroughfare on the Sabbath day, thus committing a capital offence; v. Shab. XI, 1-3. ');">¹⁴</span> from the beginning to the end of a space of four cubits<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., passing through a distance of not less than four cubits which is the minimum required to make him liable for the violation of Sabbath; v. supra p. 138. ');">¹⁵</span>

רב הונא בר יהודה איקלע לבי אביוני אתא לקמיה דרבא א"ל כלום מעשה בא לידך א"ל ישראל שאנסוהו עובדי כוכבים והראה ממון חבירו בא לידי וחייבתיו

and it cut through some silk in its passage, he would be exempt,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' From civil liability for the silk. ');">¹⁶</span> for the outset [of the motion] was subservient to its termination, for which he is liable to capital punishment;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Into which all civil offences committed at that time merge (Keth. 31a); v. supra 192; no civil liability was therefore maintained in the case of vitiating wine by idolatrous libation which is a capital offence; cf. Sanh. VII, 4-6. ');">¹⁷</span>

א"ל אהדר עובדא למריה דתני ישראל שאנסוהו עובדי כוכבים והראה ממון חבירו פטור ואם נטל ונתן ביד חייב

but subsequently it was decided in accordance with R. Jeremiah, for R. Jeremiah said: From the moment the defendant lifted up the wine<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., before he ever started to commit the idolatrous libation. ');">¹⁸</span> it entered into his possession,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the capacity of robbery. ');">¹⁹</span>

אמר רבה אם הראה מעצמו כנשא ונתן ביד דמי

and he thus became liable to make pecuniary compensation<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the capacity of robbery. ');">¹⁹</span> whereas he does not become liable to capital punishment until the very moment of the [idolatrous] libation.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Git. 52b. And since the civil liability is neither for the same act nor for the same moment which occasions the liability for capital punishment, each liability holds good. ');">²⁰</span>

ההוא גברא דאנסוהו עובדי כוכבים ואחוי אחמרא דרב מרי בריה דרב פנחס בריה דרב חסדא א"ל דרי ואמטי בהדן דרא ואמטי בהדייהו אתא לקמיה דרב אשי פטריניה

Happening to be at Be-Ebyone<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'poor-house', but according to Rashi 'a proper name of a place.' [Funk, Monumenta Talmudica, I, 290, identifies it with a locality Abjum, N. of Mosul on the Tigris; Goldschmidt renders: in an Ebionite town.] ');">²¹</span> R. Huna b. Judah visited Raba who said to him: Has any case [about which you are in doubt] recently been decided by you? — He replied: I had to decide the case of an Israelite whom heathens forced to show them another man's possessions and I ordered him to pay. He, however, said to him: Reverse the judgment in favour of the defendant, as taught: An Israelite who was forced by heathens to show them another man's possessions is exempt, though if he personally took it and gave it [to the heathens] with [his own] hand, he would be liable. Rabbah<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'Raba' according to MS.M. ');">²²</span>

א"ל רבנן לרב אשי והתניא אם נשא ונתן ביד חייב א"ל הני מילי היכא דלא אוקמיה עילויה מעיקרא אבל היכא דאוקמיה עילויה מעיקרא מיקלי קלייה

said: If he showed it on his own accord it is the same [in law] as if he personally took it and gave it to the robber with [his own] hand. A certain man was forced by heathens to show them the wine of Mari the son of R. Phine has<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' But according to MS.M. 'R. Mari and R. Phineas, the sons of&nbsp;…' The fact, however, that R. Ashi was a contemporary is rather in favour of the reading in the text; but cf. also Alfasi and Asheri. ');">²³</span>

איתיביה רבי אבהו לרב אשי אמר לו אנס הושיט לי פקיע עמיר זה או אשכול ענבים זה והושיט לו חייב הכא במאי עסקינן כגון דקאי בתרי עברי נהרא

the son of R. Hisda. The heathens then said to him, 'Carry the wine and bring it along with us,' so he carried it and brought it along with them. When he was brought before R. Ashi he exempted him. The Rabbis said to R. Ashi: Was it not taught: 'If he personally took it and gave it to the heathens with [his own] hand, he would be liable'? — He said to them: This ruling applies only where the heathens were not standing near it,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., where they have not yet become possessed of it; cf. Rashi and the Codes. ');">²⁴</span> whereas where they stood near it is the same [in the eye of the law] as if it had already been burnt.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The defendant could thus be made liable neither for the act of showing, for at that time be did not handle the wine, nor for the act of carrying which was after the wine had virtually entered the possession of the heathens. ');">²⁵</span>

דיקא נמי דקתני הושיט ולא תני תן ש"מ:

R. Abbahu<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' More probably 'R. Abba' [since R. Abbahu lived much earlier than R. Ashi; v. D.S.]. Asheri: 'Rabina', Alfasi: 'R. Kahana'. ');">²⁶</span> raised an objection to [the explanation of] R. Ashi [from the following]: 'If a ruffian said<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [ [H] another term for 'massik' of the Mishnah. Klein, NB. p. 14, n. 11.] ');">²⁷</span>

ההוא שותא דהוו מנצו עלה בי תרי האי אמר דידי הוא והאי אמר דידי הוא אזל חד מנייהו ומסרה לפרהגנא דמלכא אמר אביי יכול לומר אנא כי מסרי דידי מסרי א"ל רבא וכל כמיניה אלא אמר רבא משמתינן ליה עד דמייתי ליה וקאי בדינא

to him, "Hand me this bunch of sheaves or this cluster of grapes," and he handed it to him, he would be liable'?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Is this not a case where the ruffian had already been standing nearby the misappropriated article? ');">²⁸</span> [No,] we are dealing here with a case where they were standing on two banks of a river.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which separates the robber from the articles he intended to misappropriate. ');">²⁹</span>

ההוא גברא דהוה בעי אחוויי אתיבנא דחבריה אתא לקמיה דרב א"ל לא תחוי ולא תחוי א"ל מחוינא ומחוינא יתיב רב כהנא קמיה דרב שמטיה לקועיה מיניה

That this was the case could also be proved from the use of the word 'hand' instead of 'give'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. 'A.Z. 6b. ');">³⁰</span> This indeed proves it.

קרי רב עילויה (ישעיהו נא, כ) בניך עולפו שכבו בראש כל חוצות כתוא מכמר מה תוא זה כיון שנפל במכמר אין מרחמין עליו אף ממון של ישראל כיון שנפל ביד עובדי כוכבים אין מרחמין עליו

Two persons were quarrelling about a certain net. One said, 'It is mine', and the other said, 'It is mine.' One of them eventually went and surrendered it to the Parangaria<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the office of public service; cf. B.M. 83b. ');">³¹</span> of the King [for confiscation]. Abaye thereupon said that he should be entitled to plead: 'When I surrendered the article it was my own property that I surrendered.' Said Raba to him: 'Why [should he be] believed [if he says so]?' Raba therefore said: We would have to impose a Shamta<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A ban. ');">³²</span>

א"ל רב כהנא עד האידנא הוו פרסאי דלא קפדי אשפיכות דמים והשתא איכא יוונאי דקפדו אשפיכות דמים ואמרי מרדין מרדין קום סק לארעא דישראל וקביל עלך דלא תקשי לרבי יוחנן שבע שנין

upon him until be brings back [the net]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. MS.M. and also Alfasi and Asheri a.l. ');">³³</span> and appears before the Court.

אזיל אשכחיה לריש לקיש דיתיב וקא מסיים מתיבתא דיומא לרבנן אמר להו ריש לקיש היכא אמרו ליה אמאי אמר להו האי קושיא והאי קושיא והאי פירוקא והאי פירוקא אמרו ליה לריש לקיש אזל ריש לקיש א"ל לרבי יוחנן ארי עלה מבבל לעיין מר במתיבתא דלמחר

A certain man who was desirous of showing another man's straw [to be confiscated] appeared before Rab, who said to him: 'Don't show it! Don't show it!' He retorted: 'I <i>will</i> show it! I <i>will</i> show it!' R. Kahana was then sitting before Rab, and he tore [that man's] windpipe out of him. Rab thereupon quoted: <i>Thy sons have fainted, they lie at the heads of all the streets as a wild bull in a net</i>;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Isa. LI, 20. ');">³⁴</span> just as when a <i>'wild bull'</i> falls into a<i> 'net'</i> no one has mercy upon it, so with the property of an Israelite, as soon as it falls into the hands of heathen oppressors no mercy is exercised towards it.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' More correctly perhaps, 'towards him', referring thus to the Israelite; v. Ab. II, 2, also Asheri B.K. X, 27; the act of R. Kahana was in this way vindicated. ');">³⁵</span>

למחר אותבוה בדרא קמא קמיה דר' יוחנן אמר שמעתתא ולא אקשי שמעתתא ולא אקשי אנחתיה אחורי שבע דרי עד דאותביה בדרא בתרא א"ל רבי יוחנן לר"ש בן לקיש ארי שאמרת נעשה שועל

Rab therefore said to him: 'Kahana, until now the Greeks<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So MS.M.; cur. edd.: Persians. [The reference is to the Parthians whose sway over Babylon came to an end in 266, when they were defeated by the Sassanians.] ');">³⁶</span> who did not take much notice of bloodshed were [here and had sway, but] now the persians<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So MS.M.; curr. edd.: Greeks. [Ardeshir, the first of the Sassanian kings, deprived the Jews of the right they had hitherto exercised under the Parthians of inflicting capital punishment, v. Funk, Die fuden in Babylonien, I, 68.] ');">³⁷</span>

אמר יהא רעוא דהני שבע דרי להוו חילוף שבע שנין דאמר לי רב קם אכרעיה א"ל נהדר מר ברישא אמר שמעתתא ואקשי אוקמיה בדרא קמא אמר שמעתתא ואקשי

who are particular regarding bloodshed are here, and they will certainly say, "Murder, murder!";<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [Or 'Rebellion '; v. B.M. (Sonc. ed.) p. 235, n. 7.] ');">³⁸</span> arise therefore and go up to the Land of Israel but take it upon yourself that you will not point out any difficulty to R. Johanan<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Hul. 95b. ');">³⁹</span>

ר' יוחנן הוה יתיב אשבע בסתרקי שלפי ליה חדא בסתרקא מתותיה אמר שמעתתא ואקשי ליה עד דשלפי ליה כולהו בסתרקי מתותיה עד דיתיב על ארעא רבי יוחנן גברא סבא הוה ומסרחי גביניה אמר להו דלו לי עיני ואחזייה דלו ליה במכחלתא דכספא

for the next seven years. When he arrived there he found Resh Lakish sitting and going over<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [So Rashi. Kaplan, J. The Redaction of the Babylonion Talmud, p. 206, explains the phrase [H] as referring to a particular kind of lecture, devoted to the defining of the terse conclusions reached during the day in the academy.] ');">⁴⁰</span> the lecture of the day for [the younger of] the Rabbis.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. B.M. 84a; also Sanh. 24a. ');">⁴¹</span>

חזא דפרטיה שפוותיה סבר אחוך קמחייך ביה חלש דעתיה ונח נפשיה למחר אמר להו רבי יוחנן לרבנן חזיתו לבבלאה היכי עביד אמרו ליה דרכיה הכי על לגבי מערתא חזא דהוה

He thereupon said to them: 'Where is Resh Lakish?'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' MS.M. adds, 'and R. Kahana did not know that it was Resh Lakish (who was repeating the other lecture).' ');">⁴²</span> They said to him: 'Why do you ask?' He replied: 'This point [in the lecture] is difficult and that point is difficult, but this could be given as an answer and that could be given as an answer.' When they mentioned this to Resh Lakish, Resh Lakish went and said to R. Johanan: 'A lion<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. Ab. IV, 15, and B.M. 84b. ');">⁴³</span> has come up from Babylon; let the Master therefore look very carefully into tomorrow's lecture.' On the morrow R. Kahana was seated on the first row of disciples before R. Johanan, but as the latter made one statement and the former did not raise any difficulty, another statement, and the former raised no difficulty, R. Kahana was put back through the seven rows until he remained seated upon the very last row. R. Johanan thereupon said to R. Simeon b. Lakish: 'The lion you mentioned turns out to be a [mere] fox.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 699, n. 9. ');">⁴⁴</span> R. Kahana thereupon<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' MS.M.: 'he went out of the college.' ');">⁴⁵</span> whispered [in prayer]: 'May it be the will [of Heaven] that these seven rows be in the place of the seven years mentioned by Rab.' He thereupon immediately stood on his feet<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is missing in MS.M. according to which it was on another day when R. Johanan made new statements that R. Kahana said so. ');">⁴⁶</span> and said to R. Johanan: 'Will the Master please start the lecture again from the beginning.' As soon as the latter made a statement [on a matter of law], R. Kahana pointed out a difficulty, and so also when R. Johanan subsequently made further statements, for which he was placed again on the first row. R. Johanan was sitting upon seven cushions. Whenever he made a statement against which a difficulty was pointed out, one cushion was pulled out from under him, [and so it went on until] all the cushions were pulled out from under him and he remained seated upon the ground. As R. Johanan was then a very old man and his eyelashes were overhanging he said to them, 'Lift up my eyes for me as I want to see him.' So they lifted up his eyelids with silver pincers. He saw that R. Kahana's lips were parted<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A physical defect owing to an accidental wound. ');">⁴⁷</span> and thought that he was laughing at him. He felt aggrieved and in consequence the soul of R. Kahana went to rest.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. B.M. 84a regarding R. Johanan and Resh Lakish. ');">⁴⁸</span> On the next day R. Johanan said to our Rabbis, 'Have you noticed how the Babylonian was making [a laughing-stock of us]?' But they said to him, 'This was his natural appearance.' He thereupon went to the cave [of R. Kahana's grave] and saw