Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) WHY ONE PAYS FOR DAMAGE CAUSED BY FIRE

(a) (Mishnah): A dog that took...
(b) (R. Yochanan): One is obligated for fire because it is as if he threw an arrow.
(c) (Reish Lakish): He is obligated because it is his property.
(d) Question: Why didn't Reish Lakish say as R. Yochanan?
(e) Answer: A person gives impetus to arrows, not to fire.
(f) Question: Why didn't R. Yochanan say as Reish Lakish?
(g) Answer: Property has substance, fire has no substance.
(h) (Mishnah): A dog took a cake (with a coal inside)...
(i) This fits the opinion that he is obligated as for arrows - this is the dog's arrow.
(j) Question: According to the opinion that it is his property - the coal is not the property of the dog's owner!
(k) Answer: The case is, the dog threw the coal; it pays full damage for the cake, half-damage for where the coal was thrown (as pebbles - some explain, as Keren (for this is unusual)), and it is exempt for the rest of the grain.

1. R. Yochanan explains, the dog placed the coal down; it pays full damage for the cake (Shen) and for where the coal was placed (fire), and half-damage for the rest (pebbles).

(l) (Mishnah): A camel laden with flax was walking in a public domain; the flax entered a store, caught fire from the storeowner's lamp, and burned the building - the camel's owner is liable;

1. If the storeowner left his lamp outside, he is liable.
2. R. Yehudah says, if it was lit for the Mitzvah of Chanukah, he is exempt.
3. This fits the opinion that fire is obligated as for arrows - this is the camel's arrow.
4. Question: According to the opinion that it is his property - the lamp is not the property of the camel's owner!
5. Answer: The case is, the camel brushed the burning flax against the entire building.
6. Question: But the end of the Mishnah says, if the storeowner left his lamp outside, he is liable - if the camel brushed the burning flax against the entire building, why is the storeowner liable?
7. Answer: The load of flax was so big that the camel rubbed the burning flax against the entire building while standing still.
8. Question: All the more so, the camel's owner should be liable (for not moving his camel)!
9. Answer (Rav Huna bar Mano'ach): The camel stopped to pass water.

i. When the flax entered the shop and caught fire - the camel's owner was at fault for overloading the camel;
ii. When the lamp was outside, the storeowner was at fault.

(a) (Mishnah): Reuven lit a stack of grain; there was a kid tied to it and a slave nearby, and they were burned - Reuven is liable;

1. If there was a slave tied to it and a kid nearby, and they were burned - Reuven is exempt.
2. This fits the opinion that fire is obligated as for arrows (because he is worthy to die for killing the slave, he does not pay money).
3. Question: According to the opinion that it is his property, why is he exempt?

i. Why is this different than when his ox gores a slave (Rashi - he must pay 30 Shekalim for the slave; Tosfos - he must pay for other damage done at the same time).

4. Answer: The case is, he directly burned the slave, because he is worthy to die for killing the slave, he does not pay.
5. Question: If so, obviously he is exempt!
6. Answer: The Chidush is, even thought the kid and slave belong to different people, he is exempt for both.

(b) (Mishnah): Reuven sent a flame with a deaf person, lunatic or child (Shimon) - Beis Din cannot force him to pay, but he is liable at the hands of Heaven.

1. This fits the opinion that fire is obligated as for arrows - Reuven need not pay for the Shimon's arrows.
2. Question: According to the opinion that it is his property, he should be liable, just as if he asked Shimon to guard his ox!
3. Answer (Reish Lakish): Reuven is only exempt if he gave Shimon a coal, and the Shimon blew on it (and it flared up)

i. If he gave a flame, Reuven is liable.
ii. This is because it is a clear damager.

4. R. Yochanan holds, even if he gave a flame, Reuven is liable - Shimon caused the damage by the way he held the flame.

i. Reuven is only liable for gross negligence, i.e. he gave, dry wood, (small) kindling wood and a lamp.

(c) (Rava): A verse and a Beraisa support R. Yochanan.

1. A verse - "When fire will go out" - by itself - "the one who burned will pay" (he is called one who burned).
2. A Beraisa - 'The Torah first mentioned money that damages, and concludes with a person that damages' - to teach that fire is liable because it is as his arrows.