Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) PAYING THE VALUE OF THE VICTIM

(a) (Reish Lakish): One does not pay if his ox unintentionally killed a slave - "He will give 30 Shekalim, and the ox will be stoned" - the owner only pays when the ox is stoned.
(b) (Rabah): One does not pay if his ox unintentionally killed a free man - "The ox will be stoned, and also the owner will die. If Kofer will be put upon him... " - the owner only pays when the ox is stoned.
(c) Question (Abaye - Mishnah): A man says 'My ox killed Ploni or Ploni's ox' - he pays by his own admission.

1. Suggestion: He pays Kofer (even though his ox is not stoned on his admission)!

(d) Answer: No, he pays as money (normal damages), not as Kofer.
(e) Question: But the end of the Mishnah says 'My ox killed Ploni's slave' - he does not pay by his own admission!

1. Why shouldn't he pay as money?
2. Rabah: I could tell you, the first clause speaks of paying as money, the second clause speaks of the fine - but that it is a poor answer.

(f) Answer (Rabah): Both talk of money.

1. By a free man, he (sometimes) pays Kofer through his own admission (as we will explain shortly), so when there are no witnesses, he pays money;
2. By a slave, he (never) pays a fine through his own admission (as we will explain), so when there are no witnesses, he does not pay money.

i. One pays Kofer through his own admission - for example, if witnesses testify to the goring, but they did not know if the ox was Mu'ad, and the owner says that it was Mu'ad.
ii. One does not pay the fine for a slave through his own admission - (even) if witnesses testify to the goring, but they did not know if the ox was Mu'ad, and the owner says that it was Mu'ad.

(g) Question (Rav Shmuel bar Rav Yitzchak - Beraisa): Anything liable for (killing) a free man is liable for a slave - this applies to Kofer and killing the ox.

1. Question: Kofer does not apply to slaves!
2. Answer: Rather, it refers to money (their value).

(h) Answer (Rav Shmuel bar Rav Yitzchak or Rabah]): The Mishnah means, any case that pays Kofer for a free man, i.e. with intention according to witnesses, pays the fine for a slave;

1. Cases that pay money for a free man, e.g. without intention according to witnesses, pay money for a slave.

(i) Question (Rava): If so, one should pay money when one killed through fire unintentionally according to witnesses!

1. Question: How does Rava know that one does not?

i. Suggestion (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; if there was a slave tied to it and a kid nearby, and they were burned - Reuven is exempt.
ii. Rejection: Reish Lakish said, the case is that he directly burned the slave - he is exempt because he is liable to death!

2. Answer #1 (Beraisa): Stringencies of a fire over a pit...it is liable even for things unfitting for it to consume.

i. It does not say 'A fire pays money without intention, a pit does not.'

3. Rejection: Perhaps the Tana omitted some cases.
4. Answer #2: Rava himself did not know whether one pays money for fire without intention according to witnesses.
5. Do we say, an ox pays Kofer with intention, it pays money without intention - but fire does not pay Kofer with intention, it does not pay money without intention?
6. Or - do we say, an ox pays money without intention, even though it does not pay Kofer - also fire, even though it does not pay Kofer even with intention, it pays money without intention?

(j) This question is unresolved.

(a) (Rav Dimi, citing R. Yochanan): "If Kofer will be set on him" - this includes Kofer without intention as with intention.
(b) Question (Abaye): If so, you should also expound "If a slave", that one pays the fine for a slave without intention as with intention!

1. Suggestion: Perhaps that is the law!
2. Rejection: Reish Lakish taught, an ox that unintentionally killed a slave is exempt from 30 Shekalim.

(c) Answer: (That is the law;) Rav Dimi argues on Reish Lakish.
(d) (Ravin, citing R. Yochanan): "If a slave" - this teaches that one pays the fine for a slave without intention as with intention.
(e) Suggestion: Since Reish Lakish does not expound "If a slave" as R. Yochanan - he also argues regarding Kofer!
(f) Rejection: No, he admits by "If Kofer".
(g) Question: What is the difference?
(h) Answer: "If Kofer" is written by the payment; "If a slave" is not.