## Bava Kamma Daf 36b

###### Bava Kamma 36b:1
[Bava Kamma 36b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/36b:1)

יַחֲזִיר לְשֶׁלְּפָנָיו״?! ״לְכוּלָּם״ מִבְּעֵי לֵיהּ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**he shall return** it **to the** owner of the **previous** ox, the mishna **should have** ruled that the surplus shall be returned **to all of them,** i.e., all the prior injured parties, since they all share joint ownership of the belligerent ox.


###### Bava Kamma 36b:2
[Bava Kamma 36b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/36b:2)

אָמַר רָבָא: לְעוֹלָם כְּרַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל – דְּאָמַר בַּעֲלֵי חוֹבוֹת נִינְהוּ; וּדְקַשְׁיָא לָךְ: ״אַחֲרוֹן אַחֲרוֹן נִשְׂכָּר״?! ״רִאשׁוֹן רִאשׁוֹן נִשְׂכָּר״ מִבְּעֵי לֵיהּ! הָכָא בְּמַאי עָסְקִינַן – כְּגוֹן שֶׁתְּפָסוֹ נִיזָּק לִגְבּוֹת הֵימֶנּוּ, וְנַעֲשָׂה עָלָיו כְּשׁוֹמֵר שָׂכָר לִנְזָקִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said: Actually,** the mishna is **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yishmael, who says** that all the injured parties **are creditors. And as for the difficulty you** pose, that instead of stating that the owner of **the latest** of the oxen gored in succession **gains,** the mishna **should have** stated that the owner of **the earliest** of the oxen gored in succession **gains,** that can be answered. **With what are we dealing here?** We are dealing with a case **where the** first **injured** party **seized** the ox **to collect** payment **from it, and** consequently **became like a paid bailee** with regard **to damage** it causes. Therefore, he is responsible for any subsequent attacks by the ox. Similarly, if the next injured party seizes the ox from the first as compensation, he becomes responsible for any subsequent attacks.


###### Bava Kamma 36b:3
[Bava Kamma 36b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/36b:3)

אִי הָכִי, ״יֵשׁ בּוֹ מוֹתָר – יַחֲזִיר לְשֶׁלְּפָנָיו״?! ״יַחֲזִיר לַבְּעָלִים״ מִבְּעֵי לֵיהּ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **If so,** instead of the mishna stating that **if there is surplus** value left **in** his ox after he pays that owner, **he shall return** it **to** the owner of **the previous** ox that was gored, **it should have** stated that **he shall return it to** its **owner,** since half the value of the belligerent ox belongs to its owner, who is not responsible for any later damage it causes.


###### Bava Kamma 36b:4
[Bava Kamma 36b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/36b:4)

אָמַר רָבִינָא, הָכִי קָתָנֵי: אִם יֵשׁ בּוֹ מוֹתָר בִּנְזָקָיו – יַחֲזִיר לְשֶׁלְּפָנָיו.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Ravina said** that **this is what** the mishna **is teaching: If there is surplus** value **with regard to its damages,** i.e., the latter injured party sustained less of a loss than the previous one, that injured party **shall return** this surplus value **to the previous** injured party.


###### Bava Kamma 36b:5
[Bava Kamma 36b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/36b:5)

וְכֵן כִּי אֲתָא רָבִין, אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: מִשּׁוּם פְּשִׁיעַת שׁוֹמְרִין נָגְעוּ בָּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Similarly, when Ravin came** from Eretz Yisrael, he related that **Rabbi Yoḥanan said:** The mishna **touched on this** topic **with regard to a bailee’s negligence.**


###### Bava Kamma 36b:6
[Bava Kamma 36b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/36b:6)

בְּמַאי אוֹקֵימְתַּהּ – כְּרַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל; אִי הָכִי, אֵימָא סֵיפָא, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: שׁוֹר שָׁוֶה מָאתַיִם שֶׁנָּגַח שׁוֹר שָׁוֶה מָאתַיִם, וְאֵין הַנְּבֵלָה יָפָה כְּלוּם – זֶה נוֹטֵל מָנֶה וְזֶה נוֹטֵל מָנֶה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **In accordance with which** opinion **did you interpret** the ruling in the mishna? Was it **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yishmael? If so, say the latter clause** of the mishna: **Rabbi Shimon says** that the division of the compensation is as follows: With regard to an innocuous **ox worth two hundred** dinars **that gored an ox worth two hundred** dinars, thereby killing it, **and the carcass is worthless,** the injured party **takes one hundred dinars** from the proceeds of the sale of the belligerent ox, **and** the owner of the belligerent ox **takes** the remaining **one hundred dinars.**


###### Bava Kamma 36b:7
[Bava Kamma 36b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/36b:7)

חָזַר וְנָגַח שׁוֹר אַחֵר שָׁוֶה מָאתַיִם – הָאַחֲרוֹן נוֹטֵל מָנֶה, וְשֶׁלְּפָנָיו – זֶה נוֹטֵל חֲמִשִּׁים זוּז, וְזֶה נוֹטֵל חֲמִשִּׁים זוּז. חָזַר וְנָגַח שׁוֹר שָׁוֶה מָאתַיִם – הָאַחֲרוֹן נוֹטֵל מָנֶה, וְשֶׁלְּפָנָיו נוֹטֵל חֲמִשִּׁים זוּז, וּשְׁנַיִם הָרִאשׁוֹנִים דִּינַר זָהָב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If the ox, after goring the first ox but before compensation had been paid, **again gored another ox worth two hundred** dinars, and the carcass is worthless, the owner of **the last** ox that was gored **takes one hundred dinars; and** with regard to payment for **the previous** goring, the owner of **this** ox that was gored **takes fifty dinars,** which is half the remaining value of the belligerent ox after one hundred dinars were paid to the last injured party, **and** the owner of **that** belligerent ox **takes** the remaining **fifty dinars.** If the ox, after goring the first two oxen but before compensation had been paid, again **gored another ox worth two hundred** dinars, and the carcass is worthless, **the last** injured party **takes one hundred dinars, the previous one** takes **fifty dinars, and the first two** divide the remainder, each receiving **one gold dinar,** which is worth twenty-five silver dinars.


###### Bava Kamma 36b:8
[Bava Kamma 36b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/36b:8)

אֲתָאן לְרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, דְּאָמַר: תּוֹרָא דְשׁוּתָּפֵי הוּא; רֵישָׁא רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל וְסֵיפָא רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara continues: In the ruling of Rabbi Shimon, **we arrive at** the opinion of **Rabbi Akiva, who says** that **the ox belongs to** its owner and to the injured party, who are considered **partners** in the ownership of the ox. Is it possible that **the first clause** is in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Yishmael and the latter clause** is in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Akiva?**


###### Bava Kamma 36b:9
[Bava Kamma 36b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/36b:9)

אָמְרִי: אִין, דְּהָא אֲמַר לֵיהּ שְׁמוּאֵל לְרַב יְהוּדָה: שִׁינָּנָא, שְׁבוֹק מַתְנִיתִין וְתָא בָּתְרַאי – רֵישָׁא רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל וְסֵיפָא רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Sages **said** that **yes,** this is the case, **as Shmuel said to Rav Yehuda: *Shinnana*, leave** the presumption that **the** entire **mishna** follows one opinion **and follow my** interpretation: **The first clause** is in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Yishmael and the latter clause** is in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Akiva.**


###### Bava Kamma 36b:10
[Bava Kamma 36b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/36b:10)

אִתְּמַר נָמֵי, אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: הִקְדִּישׁוֹ נִיזָּק אִיכָּא בֵּינַיְיהוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**It was also stated** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan says:** The practical difference **between** the opinions of Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Shimon in the mishna is with regard to a case where **the injured** party **consecrated** the ox. If he is a partner in the ownership of the ox, his consecration takes effect; if he is considered merely a creditor, the consecration is ineffective. Evidently, Rabbi Yoḥanan also holds that the dispute in the mishna corresponds to the dispute between Rabbi Yishmael and Rabbi Akiva.


###### Bava Kamma 36b:11
[Bava Kamma 36b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/36b:11)

תְּנַן הָתָם: הַתּוֹקֵעַ לַחֲבֵירוֹ – נוֹתֵן לוֹ סֶלַע. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי: מָנֶה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ With regard to the gold dinar mentioned in the mishna, **we learned** in another mishna **there** (90a): **One who slaps [*hatokea*] another** is liable to **give him a *sela*** as a compensatory fine. **Rabbi Yehuda says in the name of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili:** He is liable to give him **one hundred dinars.**


###### Bava Kamma 36b:12
[Bava Kamma 36b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/36b:12)

הָהוּא גַּבְרָא דִּתְקַע לְחַבְרֵיהּ. שַׁלְּחֵיהּ רַב טוֹבִיָּה בַּר מַתְנָה לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב יוֹסֵף: סֶלַע צוֹרִי תְּנַן, אוֹ סֶלַע מְדִינָה תְּנַן?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara relates: There was **a certain man who slapped another. Rav Toviya bar Mattana sent** an enquiry **before Rav Yosef,** asking him whether the *sela* **we learned** about in the mishna is referring to **a Tyrian *sela*,** which is worth four dinars, **or** whether the *sela* **we learned** about in the mishna is referring to **a provincial *sela*,** worth only half of a dinar, or one-eighth of a Tyrian *sela*.


###### Bava Kamma 36b:13
[Bava Kamma 36b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/36b:13)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ, תְּנֵיתוּהָ: וּשְׁנַיִם הָרִאשׁוֹנִים דִּינַר זָהָב. וְאִי סָלְקָא דַעְתָּךְ תָּנֵי תַּנָּא סֶלַע מְדִינָה, נִפְלוֹג וְנִתְנֵי עַד תְּרֵיסַר וְסֶלַע!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav Yosef **said to him: You learned this** in a mishna: **And the first two** divide the remainder, each receiving **one gold dinar,** worth twenty-five silver dinars. **And if it enters your mind** that **the *tanna* teaches** monetary sums using **a provincial *sela*** in order to calculate compensation, **let him** further **divide** the value that the first two litigants receive **and teach** a case where the belligerent ox gored an additional ox, so that their shares decrease **until** they reach **twelve dinars and one *sela*** apiece, which are twelve and a half dinars. The fact that he does not do so indicates that the mishna does not use a provincial *sela*, whose value is less than one dinar, and therefore a gold dinar cannot be divided in a manner that leaves each party with whole coins.


###### Bava Kamma 36b:14
[Bava Kamma 36b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/36b:14)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: תַּנָּא כִּי רוֹכְלָא לִיתְנֵי וְלֵיזִיל?!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav Toviya bar Mattana **said to him:** This is not proof; **should the *tanna* have continued teaching** additional cases, exhausting all possibilities, **like a peddler** selling his wares, who advertises every item of his merchandise? The cases cited in the mishna suffice to illustrate the point.


###### Bava Kamma 36b:15
[Bava Kamma 36b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/36b:15)

מַאי הָוֵי עֲלַהּ? פַּשְׁטוּהָ מֵהָא דְּאָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב: כׇּל כֶּסֶף הָאָמוּר בַּתּוֹרָה – כֶּסֶף צוֹרִי, וְשֶׁל דִּבְרֵיהֶם – כֶּסֶף מְדִינָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**What** halakhic conclusion **was** reached **about** this matter? The Sages **resolved it based on** that **which Rav Yehuda says** that **Rav says: All** references to **coinage mentioned in the Torah** refer to **Tyrian coinage, whereas** all mentions **of** coinage in the **statements of** the Sages refer to **provincial coinage.** Therefore, a person who slaps another is fined a provincial *sela*, worth half of a dinar.


###### Bava Kamma 36b:16
[Bava Kamma 36b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/36b:16)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ הַהוּא גַּבְרָא: הוֹאִיל וּפַלְגָא דְזוּזָא הוּא – לָא בָּעֵינָא, נִתְּבֵיהּ לַעֲנִיִּים. הֲדַר אֲמַר לֵיהּ: נִתְּבֵיהּ נִיהֲלִי, אֵיזִיל וְאַבְרֵי בֵּיהּ נַפְשַׁאי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Following the verdict, **that man** who was slapped **said to** Rav Yosef: **Since** the fine **is** only **half a dinar, I do not want it,** as it is beneath me to collect such an amount. Instead, **let him give it to the poor. Then** he retracted his decision, and **said to** Rav Yosef: **Let him give it to me, and I will go and sustain [*ve’avri*] myself with it.**


###### Bava Kamma 36b:17
[Bava Kamma 36b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/36b:17)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב יוֹסֵף: כְּבָר זְכוֹ בֵּיהּ עֲנִיִּים. וְאַף עַל גַּב דְּלֵיכָּא עֲנִיִּים הָכָא, אֲנַן יַד עֲנִיִּים אֲנַן. דְּאָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: יְתוֹמִים

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Yosef said to him:** Since you already committed to give it to charity, **the poor have already acquired it** and it now belongs to them. **And although there are no poor** people **here** to acquire it, **we,** the court, **are the hand,** i.e., the legal extension, **of the poor.** We represent them, **as Rav Yehuda says** that **Shmuel says: Orphans**