Daf Yomi for Women – דף יומי לנשים

If you hire someone to  fix something and they break it, they are responsible to pay you the value of it.  Rav Asi holds that if you give someone wood to build you a closet and he builds it but breaks it before he gives it to you,  he is not responsible for the broken item because the object is considered in his possession and he is like a seller who sells it back to you.  THere is a long debate about whether Rav Asi’s statement is agreed upon by everyone or if there is room for another opinion.  In attempting to see if tannaim debated this issue, an argument between Rabbi Meir and the Rabbis is brought regarding a woman who says to a smith to make her jewels with her own materials and she will be betrothed to him with those jewels.  The gemara suggest 4 different options as to what the principles are that stand behind their argument.

Study Guide Bava Kamma 99

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS

The mishna distinguishes between noticeable changes and those that aren’t noticeable.  The robber acquires only through a noticeable change.  There is a debate in the mishna regarding slaves – whether they are treated like land in which the robber does not acquire the slave or is it like movable property and it is acquired by the robber.   Rav paskens like Rabbi Meir that the slaves are like land.  This psak is questionedby the gemara from a number of different directions.  Can usage of a stolen slave who isn’t working be compared to usage of an uninhabited house – where one who uses another’s house since he isn’t causing a loss for the owner, he does not need to pay?  What if one uses another’s boat without permission, what does he need to pay the owner?  The mishna distunguishes between coins that are ruined physically and those that are removed from currency.  The rabbis debate what exactly is the case of removed from currency – cannot be used in that country but can be used in another or cannot be used anywhere?  The gemara gets into a  case of one who takes a loan valued at an old currency and when he goes to pay back the loan, the currency is no longer in use.  Rav and Shmuel debate the case and Shmuel’s opinion is questioned especially in light of how Rav Nachman understand’s Shmuel’s psak.

Study Guide Bava Kamma 97

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS

Abaye brings halachot of 5 different tannaim and claims that all of them agree that changing an item doesn’t change ownership over it.  Rava disagrees and explains why each case is unique and can’t teach a general principle.  Rabbi Yochanan holds that one has to return the stolen item as is and not the value of it as discussed previously.  The gemara questions his opinion from another source but then explains that when Rabbi Yochanan made his statement, it was a case where the change was reversible.  But if it was an irreversible change, he would only be required to pay the value at the time of the theft.  Robbers and usurers who want to return from their bad ways should return the items they stole/collected but the ones they stole/collected from should not accept it from them in order to encourage them to repent.  The gemara brings various sources that seem to contradict this halacha and reconciles them.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS