Previous daf

1)

(a) In a case where Reuven held down Shimon's animal in the sun until it died, Ravina obligated him to pay. Rav Acha bar Rav ruled - that he was Patur, because it was only 'G'rama'.

(b) Ravina derived his ruling from a 'Kal va'Chomer' from our Mishnah - from 'Metzamtzem', which is Chayav (even though one is *not Chayav for Shogeg or for O'nes*), 'Kal va'Chomer' he should be Chayav for a case of Nizakin (which is).

(c) Rav Mesharshaya (Rav Acha's grandson) learns his grandfather's Din from the Pasuk "Mos Yumas ha'Makeh Rotze'ach *Hu*" - 'be'Rotze'ach Hu de'Chayav Lan Metzamtzem, be'Nizakin Lo Chayav Lan Metzamtzem'.

(a) Rava rules that if Reuven trusses up Shimon ...

1. ... who subsequently dies of famine - he is Patur (since at the time when ties him, there is nothing there that will kill him).
2. ... in the mid-day sun or in the cold, and he subsequently dies from sunstroke or from the cold - he is Chayav (since the sun and the cold are already there).
3. ... in a place, where the sun or the cold will reach later in the day - he is Patur.

(b) Rava exempts Reuven from Miysah for tying up Shimon in front of a lion - since he could not have escaped anyway.

(c) He declares him Chayav however, for tying him up in front of mosquitoes (because he could otherwise have run away from them). Rav Ashi exempts him even there, since the mosquitoes that actually kill him are not the same ones that bit him when he first tied him up (in which case it is comparable to 'Sof Chamah La's').

(a) Rav and Rebbi Zeira argue over a case where Reuven covered Shimon with a barrel, and he died because of the foul air. They also argue where - he removed the cement from the ceiling, allowing the cold to enter the room (see Tosfos DH 'Chaff Alav').

(b) We prove that Rava is the one who holds Patur from the case of Rava 'Kafso u'Meis ba'Ra'av', where the hunger sets in immediately (even though it is not yet sufficient to kill), where Rava ruled Patur.

(c) We try to counter this however, from Rebbi Zeira, who declares Reuven Chayav for enclosing Shimon in a room of marble, and lighting a candle there - implying that, were it not for the candle, he would be Patur, even though the foul air that kills Shimon begins to accumulate immediately.

(d) We reject this proof however (to remain with the proof that Rava is the one who holds Patur) - because in that case, were it not for the candle, the foul air would only begin to accumulate a short while later (not like we thought at first), unlike in our current case, where it really does begin to accumulate immediately.

4)

(a) Rava rules that, if Reuven pushes Shimon into a deep pit and Levi then removes the ladder that had been standing there (depriving him of the chance to escape) - he is Patur, because it is only 'G'rama' (indirectly causing his death i.e. removing the ladder does not kill him, nor is it even a direct cause of his death).

(b) And even if it was Reuven himself who removed the ladder ...

1. ... after Shimon reached the bottom of the pit - he still rules Patur, and even if he removed it ...
2. ... before Shimon landed.

(a) And in a case where Reuven shoots an arrow at Shimon, and Levi or even Reuven, removes ...

1. ... the shield that Shimon is holding at the time that the arrow is shot - he is Patur, for the same reason, and the same will apply in a case where he removes ...
2. ... the balm that Shimon would have used to cure himself from the wound which subsequently killed him. All of these are considered 'G'rama'.

(b) Rav Ashi extrapolates from Rava's latter ruling - that if there is a balm available to Shimon in the stores at the time when Reuven shoots the arrow - then he is Patur, even if Shimon fails to avail himself of the opportunity to obtain it.

(c) Rav Acha B'rei de'Rava asked Rav Ashi what the Din will be in a case where after being shot, a balm became available to Shimon, which would have cured him, but he failed to procure it and died - whether Reuven is Chayav, seeing as at the time when he shot him, the balm was not available.

(d) Rav Ashi replied - that he was Patur, because before he was taken to Beis-Din, there was reason to exempt him.

(a) Rava rules that if Reuven throws a ball against a wall with force with the intention of killing Shimon on the rebound, which it does - he is Chayav Miysah.

(b) The Beraisa too, rules that if big children are playing ball against a wall, and Reuven kills Shimon in the way that we just described ...

1. ... be'Meizid - he is Chayav Miysah.
2. ... be'Shogeg - he is Chayav Galus.

(c) The Chidush of this Beraisa - lies in the Reisha. We might otherwise have exempted him on the grounds of 'Hasra'as Safek' ([the warning is based on a Safek] since it is not at all certain that the ball will rebound at exactly the right angle to hit the intended victim).

(a) Rav Tachlifa from Eretz Yisrael quoting a Beraisa in front of Rebbi Avahu - confines the Chiyuv in the previous Beraisa to where the ball rebounded at least four Amos, but not if it rebounded less than that.

(b) 'Chayav' and 'Patur' must be referring to Galus and not to Miysah - because if he intended to kill with the throw, the distance that the ball rebounds would then be irrelevant.

(c) When Ravina asked Rav Ashi 'I de'ka 'Niycha Leih, Afilu Purta Nami ... ', he meant - that if Reuven wanted the ball to rebound less than four Amos, then he ought to be Chayav even then, whereas if he did not want it to travel more than four Amos, then he ought to be Patur in that case (Maharshal, see also Maharsha).

(d) Rav Ashi replied - that the Tana is speaking S'tam, and most children want the ball to travel at least four Amos. Consequently, in the event that it traveled less, he is not even considered a Shogeg, but an O'nes (since he did not intend the ball to fall where it did).

(a) Despite the fact that the ball hits Shimon from a different angle than the one that Reuven threw it, he is nevertheless Chayav - because the change of direction is still considered 'Kocho' (his force), since it is the result of the force of his throw (otherwise, it would just drop directly to the grounds.

(b) The Mishnah in Parah rules that if the ashes of the Parah Adumah that one is transferring into the water in the trough (known as Kidush) hits the Kohen's hand or the side of the trough before falling into the water - the water is Pasul (since it did fall into the water by his force.

(c) The criterion that is not being met by this happening - is 'Ko'ach Gavra' (that the ashes must be transferred by the force of the Kohen into the water, and not fall due to gravity).

(d) The Kashya on Rava from here is - that clearly, a rebound is not called 'Ko'ach Gavra, whereas according to Rava, it *is*.

(a) We answer the Kashya - by establishing the method of transfer used by the Kohen as pouring (and not throwing, as we previously assumed), in which case any rebound is the result of gravity.

(b) Another Mishnah in Parah states - that if a Kohen sprinkled ashes from the Mei Chatas on to a Tamei needle, and it is uncertain whether the ashes fell directly on to the needle, or whether they first fell on the piece of clay (on which the needle was lying), before rebounding on to the needle ('u'Mitzah Alehah') - the Haza'ah is invalid.

(c) To answer the Kashya, Rav Chinena bar Yehudah in the name of Rav amends the Lashon - from 'u'Mitzah Alehah' to 'u'Matza', meaning that the Mei Chatas did not necessarily rebound from the clay on to the needle, but that there was a slight incline in the clay, down which it might have flowed to the needle (and that is certainly not 'Ko'ach Gavra').

(a) Rav Papa rules that if Reuven bound Shimon before diverting a stream of water in his direction in order to drown him - he is Chayav.

(b) We qualify this ruling by restricting it to 'Ko'ach Rishon', but Reuven will be Patur, if Shimon is killed by Ko'ach Sheini, meaning - that the water did not fall directly on Shimon, but first proceeded to flow in his direction.

(c) Reuven is Patur - because here too, it is no longer the force of Reuven that kills him, but gravity, and gravity is always 'G'rama', and G'rama is always Patur ...

(d) ... be'Diynei Adam, but Chayav be'Diynei Shamayim.

(a) Rav Papa rules that if Reuven throws a clump of earth into the air and it travels in an arc and falls on Shimon and kills him - he is Chayav.

(b) If it were to return to earth in a vertical line and kill Shimon - he would be Patur (because that too, would be gravity and not Kocho).

(c) Mar bar Rav Ashi's problem with the first ruling was - that 'Mah Nafshach', if the descent of the clump is considered Kocho, then it should have continued to ascend, whereas if it is not, then it should have descended in a straight line?

(d) Rav Papa explained to him - that it certainly descended by his force, only a weakened one (sufficient to render him Chayav).