Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) FOLLOWING THE ROV (cont.)

(a) Question (Mishnah): An ox gored a cow; a dead calf is found by the cow, we do not know if the calf was born before the goring (and died by itself), or after the goring (and died on account of the goring). The ox pays half-damage for the cow, and quarter-damage for the calf.

1. Question: Why don't we follow the Rov of animals, most give birth to live calves - since this did not, we assume this was because of the goring!

(b) Answer: There we do not follow the Rov because we do not know how the goring happened: perhaps the cow saw the ox coming and miscarried out of fear, or perhaps the ox gored it from the back (it never saw the ox coming), the miscarriage was because of the goring;

1. We are in doubt - in all doubtful monetary cases, we divide the disputed money (according to Sumchus).

(c) Suggestion: Tana'im argue as Rav and Shmuel argue.

2. (Beraisa): An ox was grazing; a dead ox was found next to it. Even if it was gored or bitten, and the live ox is Mu'ad (established) to gore or bite, we do not assume that it killed it;
3. R. Acha says, if a dead camel was found near a mating camel, surely the mating camel killed it.
4. We are assuming that Rov and Chazakah are similar (whoever followsone follows the other); the assumption that the mating camel killed the dead camel is based on Chazakah
5. Suggestion: Rav holds like R. Acha, Shmuel holds like Chachamim.

(d) Rejection #1: Even Chachamim can hold like Rav:

1. Chachamim only say that we do not follow Chazakah, they can say that we follow a Rov.

(e) Rejection #2: Even R. Acha can hold like Shmuel:

1. R. Acha only says that we follow Chazakah regarding a mating camel, for it itself is Muchzak to gore; he would not say that we following a Rov (that is only statistical, i.e. that most people buy for plowing).

(f) Question (against Rav - Mishnah): Reuven bought Shimon's fruit and planted it, and it did not grow, even flax seeds - Shimon is exempt.

1. Question: Why does it say 'even flax seeds'?
2. Answer: To teach that even though most people plant flax seeds, we do not follow the Rov.

(g) Answer: Tana'im argue about this.

1. (Beraisa): Reuven bought Shimon's fruit and planted it, and it did not grow: if he bought seeds that are not eaten, Shimon is liable; if he bought flax seeds, Shimon is exempt;
2. R. Yosi says, Shimon must return the value of flax seeds for planting.

3. Chachamim: Many people buy flax seeds for other things!

(h) Question: Which Tana'im argue about following the Rov?

1. Suggestion: R. Yosi and Chachamim that responded to him.
2. Rejection: Both follow the Rov - R. Yosi follows the Rov of seed bought, Chachamim follow the Rov of people that buy.

(i) Answer: The first Tana (does not follow the Rov), R. Yosi and the latter Chachamim do.

(a) (Beraisa): Shimon must return the value of seeds for planting;
(b) Some say, he also pays the expenditures.
(c) Question: Who is the Tana that obligates paying the expenditures?
(d) Answer (Rav Chisda): It is R. Shimon ben Gamliel.
(e) Question: From which teaching of R. Shimon ben Gamliel may we infer this?

1. Suggestion (Our Mishnah): Reuven bought Shimon's fruit and planted it, and it did not grow, even flax seeds - Shimon is exempt;
2. R. Shimon ben Gamliel says, if he bought seeds that are not eaten, Shimon is liable.

i. Question: Chachamim (the first Tana) exempted regarding flax seeds, but they admit regarding seeds that are not eaten that Shimon is liable!
ii. Answer: They only argue about how much Shimon pays: Chachamim only obligate the value of the seeds, R. Shimon ben Gamliel also obligates the expenditures.

3. Question: There is no source to say so, we could equally say just the contrary (Chachamim obligate the expenditures, R. Shimon just the seeds)!
4. Answer: No - the latter Tana always comes to add.
5. Objection: Perhaps the entire Mishnah is R. Shimon ben Gamliel; the Mishnah is abbreviated, it means as follows: Reuven bought Shimon's fruit and planted it, and it did not grow, even flax seeds - Shimon is exempt;
6. This is like R. Shimon ben Gamliel, who says that if he bought seeds that are not eaten, Shimon is liable.

(f) Answer (Beraisa): In the following cases, one is liable for substandard work if he receives wages (if he works for free, he is exempt):

1. A grinder received wheat to grind, and he did not soak it first, and he therefore produced coarse flour;
2. A baker received flour to make bread, and he made bread that crumbles;
3. A slaughterer did an invalid slaughter.
4. R. Shimon ben Gamliel says, he must also compensate the buyer and the guests for their embarrassment.
5. Similarly, R. Shimon ben Gamliel said that the custom in Yerushalayim was that if one sells food for a banquet and it spoiled, he must compensate the buyer for his and the guests' embarrassment;
6. Another custom in Yerushalayim: guests may enter to eat only as long as a cloth is spread over the doorway.

(a) (Mishnah): If Reuven sold grain to Shimon, Shimon must accept a quarter Kav of Pesoles (waste) mixed in with each Se'ah, 10 wormy figs out of every 100 , 10 barrels of bad wine out of every 100, 10 bad (empty) bottles (in Sharon) out of every 100.