## Bava Batra Daf 19b

###### Bava Batra 19b:1
[Bava Batra 19b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/19b:1)

לִצְדָדִין קָא מִשְׁתָּרְשִׁי?! וְהָא תְּנַן: הַמַּבְרִיךְ אֶת הַגֶּפֶן בָּאָרֶץ, אִם אֵין עַל גַּבָּהּ עָפָר שְׁלֹשָׁה טְפָחִים – לֹא יָבִיא זֶרַע עָלֶיהָ;

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**take root to the sides,** i.e., the growing roots spread sideways and cause damage to walls? **But didn’t we learn** in a mishna (*Kilayim* 7:1): With regard to **one who bends** a branch of **a grapevine into the ground** so that it strikes roots and produces a new vine, **if it does not have three handbreadths of earth over it he may not plant a seed above** it, as he would thereby transgress the prohibition of diverse kinds?


###### Bava Batra 19b:2
[Bava Batra 19b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/19b:2)

וְתָנֵי עֲלַהּ: אֲבָל זוֹרֵעַ אֶת הַצְּדָדִין אֵילָךְ וְאֵילָךְ. אָמַר רַבִּי חַגָּא בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי יוֹסֵי: מִפְּנֵי שֶׁמַּחֲלִידִין אֶת הַקַּרְקַע וּמַעֲלִין עָפָר תִּיחוּחַ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And it is taught with regard to** this mishna: **But one may plant on either side** of that bent branch. This indicates that there is no concern that the roots of the seeds will spread out sideways. **Rabbi Ḥagga says in the name of Rabbi Yosei:** The issue here is not that the roots will spread out sideways and reach the wall. Rather, it is prohibited to plant seeds near one’s neighbor’s property **because they break up the ground and cause loose soil to rise up,** which damages the foundation of the wall.


###### Bava Batra 19b:3
[Bava Batra 19b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/19b:3)

וְאֶת מֵי רַגְלַיִם מִן הַכּוֹתֶל – שְׁלֹשָׁה טְפָחִים וְכוּ׳. אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה: מוּתָּר לָאָדָם לְהַשְׁתִּין מַיִם בְּצַד כּוֹתְלוֹ שֶׁל חֲבֵירוֹ, דִּכְתִיב: ״וְהִכְרַתִּי לְאַחְאָב מַשְׁתִּין בְּקִיר, וְעָצוּר וְעָזוּב בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל״. וְהָא אֲנַן תְּנַן: וְאֶת מֵי רַגְלַיִם מִן הַכּוֹתֶל – שְׁלֹשָׁה טְפָחִים! הָתָם בְּשׁוֹפְכִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: **And urine** must be kept at a distance of **three handbreadths from the wall** of one’s neighbor. **Rabba bar bar Ḥana says:** It **is permitted** for **a person to urinate alongside the wall of another, as it is written: “And I will cut off from Ahab those who urinate against the wall, and him that is shut up and him that is left at large in Israel”** (I Kings 21:21). As the verse employs the term “those who urinate against the wall” to mean males, it seems that urinating against a wall was a common practice. The Gemara asks: **But didn’t we learn** in the mishna that **urine** must be kept a distance of **three handbreadths from the wall?** The Gemara answers: **There,** the mishna is referring to urine **that is poured** from a chamber pot, as opposed to urine that is passed from the body.


###### Bava Batra 19b:4
[Bava Batra 19b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/19b:4)

תָּא שְׁמַע: לֹא יִשְׁפּוֹךְ אָדָם מַיִם בְּצַד כּוֹתְלוֹ שֶׁל חֲבֵירוֹ – אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן הִרְחִיק מִמֶּנּוּ שְׁלֹשָׁה טְפָחִים! הָתָם נָמֵי בְּשׁוֹפְכִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **Come** and **hear** a *baraita*: **A person may not pour water at the side of the wall of another unless he distances** the water **three handbreadths from it.** If pouring water is prohibited, then all the more so should urination be prohibited. The Gemara explains: **There too,** it is referring to urine **that is poured** from a chamber pot.


###### Bava Batra 19b:5
[Bava Batra 19b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/19b:5)

תָּא שְׁמַע: לֹא יַשְׁתִּין אָדָם מַיִם בְּצַד כּוֹתְלוֹ שֶׁל חֲבֵירוֹ – אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן הִרְחִיק מִמֶּנּוּ שְׁלֹשָׁה טְפָחִים. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים – בְּכוֹתֶל לְבֵינִים, אֲבָל בְּכוֹתֶל אֲבָנִים – בִּכְדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יַזִּיק. וְכַמָּה? טֶפַח. וְשֶׁל צוּנְמָא – מוּתָּר. תְּיוּבְתָּא דְּרַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה, תְּיוּבְתָּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **Come** and **hear** another proof from a *baraita*: **A person may not urinate alongside the wall of another unless he distances** himself **three handbreadths from it. In what** case **is this statement said?** It is said **in** the case of **a brick wall. But in** the case of **a stone wall,** one must distance himself **enough so that it does not cause damage. And how far** must he distance himself? One **handbreadth. And** if there is **hard rock** present, it is **permitted** to urinate there. The Gemara comments: **The refutation of** the opinion of **Rabba bar bar Ḥana is a conclusive refutation,** and his ruling is rejected.


###### Bava Batra 19b:6
[Bava Batra 19b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/19b:6)

וְהָא רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה – קְרָא קָאָמַר! הָתָם הָכִי קָאָמַר: אֲפִילּוּ מִידֵּי דְּדַרְכֵּיהּ לְאַישְׁתּוֹנֵי בְּקִיר לָא שָׁבֵיקְנָא לֵיהּ, וּמַאי נִיהוּ? כַּלְבָּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But Rabba bar bar Ḥana stated a verse** in support of his opinion; how can the *baraita* rule counter to what is written in a verse? The Gemara answers: **This** is what it **is saying there,** i.e., this is the meaning of that verse: **I will not even leave** Ahab **something whose manner is to urinate against a wall. And what is that? A dog.** According to this interpretation, the verse is not referring to people at all.


###### Bava Batra 19b:7
[Bava Batra 19b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/19b:7)

אָמַר רַבִּי טוֹבִי בַּר קִיסְנָא אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: רָקִיק אֵינוֹ מְמַעֵט בַּחַלּוֹן. מַאי אִירְיָא רָקִיק? אֲפִילּוּ עָבֶה נָמֵי!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Rabbi Tovi bar Kisna says** that **Shmuel says: A wafer does not reduce** the dimensions **of a window.** When a corpse, or a significant part thereof, is in one room, its impurity can spread to a room adjacent to it if there is a window of a certain size between the rooms. Shmuel states that when one puts a wafer in a window, the wafer is not considered an obstruction, so the size of the opening as relevant to this *halakha* remains the same. The Gemara asks: **Why** discuss **specifically** this case? Why does Shmuel teach this *halakha* with regard to **a wafer? Even a thick** chunk of bread **also** does not reduce the dimensions of a window.


###### Bava Batra 19b:8
[Bava Batra 19b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/19b:8)

לָא מִיבַּעְיָא קָאָמַר: לָא מִיבַּעְיָא עָבֶה – כֵּיוָן דְּאִיחֲזִי לֵיהּ, לָא מְבַטֵּיל לֵיהּ; אֲבָל רָקִיק, דְּמִמְּאִיס – אֵימָא בַּטּוֹלֵי מְבַטֵּיל לֵיהּ; קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: Shmuel **is speaking** utilizing the style of: **It is not necessary,** as follows: **It is not necessary** to state this *halakha* with regard to **thick** bread. **Since it is fit for him** to consume, **he does not nullify it,** i.e., he does not plan to leave it in the window for an extended amount of time. **But** in the case of **a wafer, which** becomes **disgusting** when placed in a window, **I might say** that **he does nullify it** and it becomes part of the house, thereby reducing the size of the window. To counter this, Shmuel **teaches us** that even a wafer is not nullified, as it can be used to feed animals, as one is not particular about their food. Therefore, the wafer does not become part of the window in which it is placed.


###### Bava Batra 19b:9
[Bava Batra 19b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/19b:9)

וְתִיפּוֹק לֵיהּ דְּהָוֵה לֵיהּ דָּבָר שֶׁהוּא מְקַבֵּל טוּמְאָה, וְכׇל דָּבָר שֶׁהוּא מְקַבֵּל טוּמְאָה – אֵינוֹ חוֹצֵץ בִּפְנֵי הַטּוּמְאָה! שֶׁנִּילֹשׁ בְּמֵי פֵירוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges: **And** let him **derive this** *halakha* from the fact that a wafer is **an item that is susceptible to ritual impurity, and any item that is susceptible to impurity does not serve as a barrier against** the spread of **impurity.** The Gemara explains: This is referring to a wafer **that was kneaded in fruit juice,** which is not one of the liquids that renders food susceptible to ritual impurity, and therefore the wafer is not susceptible to ritual impurity. Consequently, one might have thought that it serves as a barrier before ritual impurity and reduces the dimensions of the window.


###### Bava Batra 19b:10
[Bava Batra 19b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/19b:10)

מֵיתִיבִי: קוּפָּה מְלֵאָה תֶּבֶן, וְחָבִית מְלֵאָה גְּרוֹגְרוֹת, הַמּוּנָּחִים בַּחַלּוֹן – רוֹאִין, כֹּל שֶׁאִילּוּ יִנָּטְלוּ וִיכוֹלִין תֶּבֶן וּגְרוֹגְרוֹת לַעֲמוֹד בִּפְנֵי עַצְמָן – חוֹצְצִין, וְאִם לָאו – אֵין חוֹצְצִין. וְהָא תֶּבֶן חֲזֵי לִבְהֶמְתּוֹ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara **raises an objection** to Shmuel’s opinion from a mishna (*Oholot* 6:2): With regard to **a basket** that is **full of straw, or** an earthenware **barrel full of dried figs, which are placed in a window,** one **considers: If the straw or dried figs would stand on their own were** the basket or barrel **removed,** then **they would serve as a barrier against** the spread of impurity. **But if** they would **not** stand on their own **they would not serve as a barrier.** The Gemara explains the objection: **But** why should the straw or dried figs serve as a barrier? Even **straw** that can stand on its own **is fit for** feeding to **one’s animal** and will likely be removed from the opening, which means it should not be considered part of the window.


###### Bava Batra 19b:11
[Bava Batra 19b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/19b:11)

בְּסַרְיָא. חֲזֵי לְטִינָא! דְּאִית בֵּיהּ קוֹצֵי. חֲזֵי לְהַסָּקָה! בִּמְתוּנָא. חֲזֵי לְהֶסֵּק גָּדוֹל! הֶסֵּק גָּדוֹל לָא שְׁכִיחַ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: The ruling of the mishna is stated **with regard to rotted** straw, which is unfit for animal consumption. The Gemara asks: But **it is fit for** use in the making of **clay** for bricks. The Gemara answers: This is referring to straw **that has thorns in it** and therefore is not fit for making bricks. The Gemara challenges: Even so, it is **fit for kindling** a fire. The Gemara answers that this is referring **to wet** straw. The Gemara responds: Nevertheless, it is **fit for kindling a large** fire. If one builds a large fire, wet straw will dry and become ignitable. The Gemara answers: **A large fire is not common,** and therefore, in all likelihood, the straw will remain in the window.


###### Bava Batra 19b:12
[Bava Batra 19b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/19b:12)

גְּרוֹגְרוֹת – הָא חֲזוּ לֵיהּ! אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: בְּשֶׁהִתְרִיפוּ. וְכֵן תָּנֵי רַבָּה בַּר אֲבוּהּ: בְּשֶׁהִתְרִיפוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara further asks: But **dried figs are fit for him** to consume, and he will certainly remove them. Consequently, they should not be considered fixed in their place. **Shmuel says:** This is referring to a case **where** the figs **became worm infested [*beshehitrifu*]. And so Rabba bar Avuh teaches:** This is referring to a case **where** the figs **became worm infested.**


###### Bava Batra 19b:13
[Bava Batra 19b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/19b:13)

הַאי חָבִית, הֵיכִי דָּמְיָא? אִי דְּפוּמָּא לְבַר –

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara clarifies: **What are the** exact **circumstances of this barrel** that held the dried figs? **If** this is referring to a case **where** its **opening faced outward,** i.e., not toward the source of the ritual impurity,