## Bava Kamma Daf 100a

###### Bava Kamma 100a:1
[Bava Kamma 100a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/100a:1)

בֵּית חַיֵּיהֶם. ״אֶת הַדֶּרֶךְ״ – זוֹ גְּמִילוּת חֲסָדִים. ״יֵלְכוּ״ – זוֹ בִּיקּוּר חוֹלִים. ״בָּהּ״ – זוֹ קְבוּרָה. ״אֶת הַמַּעֲשֶׂה״ – זֶה הַדִּין. ״אֲשֶׁר יַעֲשׂוּן״ – זוֹ לִפְנִים מִשּׁוּרַת הַדִּין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**the core of their existence,** i.e., Torah study, which is the source of life. **“The way”; this** is referring to **acts of kindness. “They must walk”; this** is referring to **visiting the sick. “Wherein”; this** is referring to the **burial** of the dead. **“The work”; this** is referring to conducting oneself in accordance with **the law. “That they must do”; this** is referring to conducting oneself **beyond the letter of the law.** This indicates that the Torah mandates that people conduct themselves beyond the letter of the law.


###### Bava Kamma 100a:2
[Bava Kamma 100a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/100a:2)

רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ אַחְוִי לֵיהּ דִּינָרָא לְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר. אֲמַר: מְעַלְּיָא הוּא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: חֲזִי דַּעֲלָךְ קָא סָמַכְינָא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: כִּי סָמְכַתְּ עֲלַי מַאי לְמֵימְרָא, דְּאִי מִשְׁתְּכַח בִּישָׁא – בָּעֵינָא לְאַיחְלוֹפֵי לָךְ? וְהָא אַתְּ הוּא דְּאָמְרַתְּ: רַבִּי מֵאִיר הוּא, דְּדָאֵין דִּינָא דִּגְרָמֵי. מַאי, לָאו רַבִּי מֵאִיר – וְלָא סְבִירָא לַן כְּווֹתֵיהּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara relates: **Reish Lakish presented a dinar to Rabbi Elazar** so that the latter would assess it. Rabbi Elazar **said: It is a proper** coin. Reish Lakish **said to him: Realize that I am relying on you.** Rabbi Elazar **said to him: What** is the purpose **of stating that you are relying on me?** Is it so **that if** this dinar **is** later **found** to be **bad, I will be required to exchange it for you** with a good dinar? **But** it is **you who said** that **it is Rabbi Meir** who is of the opinion **that** there is **liability** for damage caused by **indirect** action, even if he did not directly cause damage to the property. **What, is it not** that you intended to say: This is the opinion of **Rabbi Meir, but we do not hold in accordance with his** opinion?


###### Bava Kamma 100a:3
[Bava Kamma 100a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/100a:3)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: לָא, רַבִּי מֵאִיר – וּסְבִירָא לַן כְּווֹתֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Reish Lakish **said to him: No,** I intended to say that this is the opinion of **Rabbi Meir, and we** do **hold in accordance with his** opinion.


###### Bava Kamma 100a:4
[Bava Kamma 100a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/100a:4)

הֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר? אִילֵימָא רַבִּי מֵאִיר (ד׳ ל׳ מ׳ פ׳ סִימָן)

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Which** statement of **Rabbi Meir** is Rabbi Elazar referring to? **If we say** it is **this** statement of **Rabbi Meir,** that is difficult. Parenthetically, the Gemara states that the letters ***dalet*, *lamed*, *mem*, *peh*** serve as **a mnemonic** device for the four statements of Rabbi Meir that will be cited. It stands for: Judged [*dan*], to dye [*litzboa*], covers [*mesakekh*], and broke open [*pirtza*].


###### Bava Kamma 100a:5
[Bava Kamma 100a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/100a:5)

דִּתְנַן: דָּן אֶת הַדִּין; זִיכָּה אֶת הַחַיָּיב; חִיֵּיב אֶת הַזַּכַּאי; טִימֵּא אֶת הַטָּהוֹר; טִיהֵר אֶת הַטָּמֵא – מַה שֶּׁעָשָׂה עָשׂוּי, וִישַׁלֵּם מִבֵּיתוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara returns to the matter at hand. **As we learned** in a mishna (*Bekhorot* 28b): If a judge **issued a judgment** and erred, and he **acquitted** one who was in fact **liable,** or **deemed liable** one who should have in fact been **acquitted,** or if he **ruled** that **a pure** item is **impure,** or **ruled** that **an impure** item is **pure,** and by doing so he caused a litigant a monetary loss, **what he did is done,** i.e., the judgment stands, **and** the judge **must pay** damages **from his home,** i.e., from his personal funds. He is therefore liable to pay the damages even though he caused the loss indirectly.


###### Bava Kamma 100a:6
[Bava Kamma 100a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/100a:6)

הָא אִיתְּמַר עֲלַהּ, אָמַר רַבִּי אִילְעָא אָמַר רַב: וְהוּא שֶׁנָּטַל וְנָתַן בַּיָּד!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains why this cannot be the statement of Rabbi Meir that Shmuel was referring to: **But wasn’t it stated with regard to that** mishna that **Rabbi Ile’a says** that **Rav says: And this** mishna is discussing a case **where** the judge not only issued a ruling, but actively **took** the money from the one whom he found liable, **and gave** it to the other party **by** his own **hand.** This is not a case of causation but of direct action.


###### Bava Kamma 100a:7
[Bava Kamma 100a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/100a:7)

אֶלָּא הָא רַבִּי מֵאִיר – דִּתְנַן: לִצְבּוֹעַ לוֹ אָדוֹם וּצְבָעוֹ שָׁחוֹר, שָׁחוֹר וּצְבָעוֹ אָדוֹם – רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר: נוֹתֵן לוֹ דְּמֵי צַמְרוֹ. הָתָם קָא עָבֵיד בְּיָדַיִם!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** Rabbi Elazar must be referring to **this** statement **of Rabbi Meir, as we learned** in a mishna (100b): If one gave wool to a dyer **to dye** it **red for him, and he dyed it black,** or to dye it **black, and he dyed it red, Rabbi Meir says:** The dyer **gives** the owner the **value of his wool.** The Gemara responds: This too does not prove that according to the opinion of Rabbi Meir one is liable even if the loss was brought about by causation, since **there he does** cause damage **through** direct **action.**


###### Bava Kamma 100a:8
[Bava Kamma 100a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/100a:8)

אֶלָּא הָא רַבִּי מֵאִיר – דִּתְנַן: הַמְסַכֵּךְ גַּפְנוֹ עַל גַּבֵּי תְּבוּאָתוֹ שֶׁל חֲבֵירוֹ – הֲרֵי זֶה קִידֵּשׁ, וְחַיָּיב. הָתָם נָמֵי קָא עָבֵיד בְּיָדַיִם!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** Rabbi Elazar must be referring to **this** statement of **Rabbi Meir, as we learned** in a mishna (*Kilayim* 7:4): **One who drapes his grapevine atop another’s grain has rendered** them **forbidden** due to the prohibition against growing diverse kinds in a vineyard, **and** he **is liable** to pay the owner of the grain for the damage. The Gemara responds: This too does not prove that according to the opinion of Rabbi Meir one is liable even if the loss was brought about by causation, since **there too he does** cause damage **by** direct **action.**


###### Bava Kamma 100a:9
[Bava Kamma 100a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/100a:9)

אֶלָּא הָא רַבִּי מֵאִיר – דְּתַנְיָא: מְחִיצַת הַכֶּרֶם שֶׁנִּפְרְצָה –

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** it must be referring to **this** statement of **Rabbi Meir, as it is taught** in the *Tosefta* (*Kilayim* 3:4): If there was **a partition of a vineyard** that is adjacent to a wheat field, and **that** partition **broke open,**