Daf Yomi for Women - Hadran

Latest Episodes:

Bava Kamma 39 - December 11, 28 Kislev Dec 11, 2023

Show notes

What are the laws regarding an ox owned by a child, a deaf-mute or a shoteh? A guardian is appointed so that the ox can become a shor muad. If the ox becomes muad, does the guardian pay or the child/deaf-mute, shoteh? Once a guardian is appointed, if the ox gores, is the animal liable to damages as a shor tam? Or is the guardian established only to create a shor muad, a forewarned ox?

Bava Kamma 38 - December 10, 27 Kislev Dec 10, 2023

Show notes

Today's daf is sponsored by Jeremy Booty in loving memory of Yehonatan Ezra ben Yarden Yehoshua v' Leah Deborah on his yahrzeit.

Today's daf is sponsored by Mindy Feldman Hecht and family in loving memory of Dr. Charles Feldman z"l. "Beloved husband, father and Saba, devoted doctor and communal leader. He would have found light in these dark days from Torah learning and strength from his family members currently serving Medinat Yisrael. May HaShem protect them and bring all the hostages home safely. Chanukah sameach u'meir."

Today's daf is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to the refuah of their son-in-law Boaz Shlomo Ben Shulamit Sara who was lightly wounded in Gaza on Shabbat morning. Wishing him and all of our wounded in the war a refuah shlema. To all of Am Yisrael -Niflaot veyishuot, niflaot unehamot.

Today's daf is dedicated to the refuah shleima of Netanel Yaakov ben Yehudit Sara, who was injured in Gaza.

If one's animal injures a gentile's ox, the owner is exempt from payment. If a gentile's ox injured a Jew's ox, the owner pays a full payment, even if the animal was a shor tam. Why is this the case? Two different verses are brought to suggest that the gentiles were penalized by God for either not accepting the seven Noahide laws or the Torah. Since they had no system of law, were it not for the obligation to pay damages, their oxen would not be watched and would be a hazard to others. Would this apply to all gentiles? Does a gentile get rewarded for learning Torah? What is appropriate and not appropriate to be said to someone mourning a loss? Ulla disagreed with the Babylonian rabbis on this issue. A discussion of the merits of Amon and Moav is brought and what lesson can be learned from them. How do we treat the Samaritans in terms of laws of damages - like gentiles or like Jews? Why?

Bava Kamma 37 - Shabbat Chanuka - December 9, 26 Kislev Dec 08, 2023

Show notes

If an animal is muad (forewarned, as the animal already gored that type of animal three times) for damaging other animals of its type, does that make the animal muad for all types of animals? If the animal is muad for people, then is the animal also considered muad for animals? If it is muad for small animals, is it muad for large animals? There are two alternative readings of the Mishna, which lead to different answers to those questions. The two different readings are brought and analyzed. Other situations of determining patterns are brought and difficulties are raised. Comparisons are made to similar issues and rules used for determining whether a woman has a set pattern for her menstrual cycle. An animal that belongs to the temple is exempt from damages. But the rabbis and Rabbi Shimon ben Menasia disagree regarding liability for a privately owned animal that gores a temple-owned animal - is the owner fully exempt or liable to pay full damages, even if the animal is tam.

Bava Kamma 36 - 1st Day of Chanuka - December 8, 25 Kislev Dec 08, 2023

Show notes

Study Guide Bava Kamma 36

This week's learning is sponsored by Adina and Danny Gewirtz in honor of the newest Meir in their family, Meir Amichai, and in loving memory of the original Meir, Adina's father, Melvin Rishe, on his 22nd yahrtzeit. "Dad was a man of many talents, a great talmid chacham, community leader, and a staunch defender of Israel in both his personal and professional life, but for us, he is most remembered for the love he showered on his family and friends. The many children named after him attest to how much he is loved and missed. He would be so proud to have this newest member of the family named after him and also with the hope that the name Meir Amichai expresses. Am Yisrael Chai!"

Today's daf is sponsored by Arthur Gould in Olam haZeh and Carol Robinson in Olam haBa in loving memory of Carol's father Louis Robinson, Yehuda Leib ben Moshe z"l. "Today, the first day of Hanukkah, we mark his 24th yahrzeit. Louis was a devoted family man and active participant in his synagogue. Lou was the consummate dad; he never went to bed until his daughters came safely home from dates and outings. For sure he is with Carol right now. We loved him and miss him very much."

When there is a doubt about which ox injured another, but both the oxen who potentially caused the injury are owned by the same owner, the Mishna rules that they are both liable. Is this a case of a short muad or a short tam? Why is the language "both are liable" used when it seems to mean the owner is responsible? The fourth chapter begins with a debate between Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Shimon about a shor tam who attacks 4 or 5 times in a row. Who gets paid what? What is the reasoning behind their opinions and how do they fit in with the broader approaches of Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Yishmael regarding whether the owner of the damaged one has rights to the animal who caused the damage or is more like a creditor who is owed money? Can we derive from our Mishna whether or not when a Mishna refers to a sela, they mean the sela tzuri, higher valued currency (4 zuzim) or the sela medina, lower valued currency, (half a zuz) one-eighth the value of the tzuri?

Bava Kamma 35 - December 7, 24 Kislev Dec 07, 2023

Show notes

The Mishna brings cases comparing situations where an animal and a person may do the same damage but one would be obligated to pay damages and the other would not. If a person burns a field on Shabbat the person is exempt from payment of damages as when one does an action punishable by death, one is exempt from monetary payment. This Mishna raises a question against Rabbi Yochanan's view that one who burns as a destructive act has not desecrated Shabbat since one is only liable for creative acts performed on Shabbat. Two alternative readings of the Mishna are brought to answer this question. If an ox was chasing another ox and one ox was injured but there are different claims made by each of the owners about whether the damage was caused by the animal or by a rock, or if there were three animals and each owner claims the other's ox caused the damage, or the owner has two oxen, one large and one small or one tam and one muad, and each owner claims it was a different ox that caused the damage, the burden of proof lies with the one trying to claim the money from the other. Rabbi Chiya bar Abba holds that Sumchus would disagree in these cases and say that the money in question is split between the two sides. The Gemara tries to assess whether the case is where each is confident in their claim (bari) or one is confident and the other is not (shema).

Bava Kamma 34 - December 6, 23 Kislev Dec 06, 2023

Show notes

Today's daf is sponsored by Deborah Hoffman-Wade in loving memory of Simcha Collins on her first yahrzeit. "Beloved scholar, romantic, and deep searcher, her love of Torah was not even closely satisfied by our twice weekly meeting to study and learn. My havruta of many years, Simcha, had a deep need to turn Torah, to be fiercely feminist, and have a multilayered mystic belief in Hashem. I miss you every day."

What rights does the owner of a shor tam or a shor muad have to sell their animal after it caused damage, designate it to the temple, slaughter it, or give it as a gift? Does it matter if it is before standing before the court? What if a creditor collected the animal as payment? Does it matter if the creditor had a lien on the animal before or after it caused the damage? Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehuda disagree on how to explain the payment for damages in the classic case of shor tam described in the Torah - it says both owners split the value of the animal that caused damage and the value of the carcass of the dead animal. They disagree about whether the owner of the shor tam has rights also to the carcass of the animal the ox gored. There is a discussion regarding what is the practical difference between the two opinions since both agree that in a typical case, the bottom line payment is the same. In particular cases, it seems Rabbi Yehuda could potentially hold that the owner of the ox who damaged can gain on the deal or, on the other extreme, pay more than the damage the ox caused. Therefore, it is explained that Rabbi Yehuda would not interpret the verse to apply in those cases. The Mishna states that there are some cases where one is liable to pay for damages done by their ox, but not by a person as a person would be exempt on account of kim lei d'beraba minei, if the action comes with a death penalty, there is no obligation to pay. Alternatively, there are cases where a person would be liable for damages that the owner of an ox would not be, as oxen who embarrass someone are not liable to pay for that.

Bava Kamma 33 - December 5, 22 Kislev Dec 05, 2023

Show notes

Study Guide Bava Kamma 33

Today's daf is sponsored by Nina Black in honor of Jane Shapiro's birthday. "To my friend, machatenista, chevruta, and essential piece of my life, Happy Birthday. I am so lucky to have known you since I was three, and to share community, grandchildren and life with you. Happy Birthday, עד 120 !"

If one enters a workshop and gets injured by the person working there, is the workshop owner obligated in the four payments for damages, and if there is an accidental death, does the owner need to go to a refuge city? Does it depend on whether the injured/dead person entered with permission or not? Is this the case where Rabbi Yosi son of Rabbi Chanina made his statement that one is obligated in four payments of damages but exempt from going to a refuge city? Or did he say it about a case where one threw a rock in a public domain and after it was thrown, someone stuck their head out a window and was injured/killed by the rock? If one went to one's employer's house to get paid and was attacked by an animal of the employer, is the employer obligated or not? On what does it depend? How do we calculate damages in a case where two animals attacked each other, or two people attacked each other, or a person and an animal? If a shor tam attacks, since the owner needs to pay up to the value of his/her animal, does that mean that the ox is designated payment for the loan or not? There is an argument about this between Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Yishmael and the ramifications of this argument are discussed and various sources are brought to try to see whose opinion they fit in with.

Bava Kamma 32 - December 4, 21 Kislev Dec 04, 2023

Show notes

Study Guide Bava Kamma 32

The Mishna brings a case of two people who are walking in the street - one with a beam and the other with a jug, if the beam breaks the jug, is the one walking with the beam responsible? On what does it depend? Raba bar Natan asks Rav Huna a question about a husband who injures his wife while having intercourse - does he need to compensate her or not? Rav Huna answers that we can learn from our Mishna that if he is permitted to be there, he does not need to pay for damages. Rava disagrees because he compares it to one who killed someone accidentally and is obligated to go to a refuge city even though the murderer had permission to be there. In addition, the Mishna referred to a case where the damage happened without any action taken on behalf of the one carrying the beam. Reish Lakish distinguishes between a case where two cows were on the road - one walking (typical behavior) and the other was crouching (atypical behavior) and one kicked the other. In which case is the owner obligated and in which case is the owner exempt? The Gemara tries to provide support for his ruling from two of the cases in our Mishna, but both attempts are unsuccessful. What is the law if one person is running in the public domain and one is walking and they bump into each other and cause damage? What if they are both running? Is there a difference if it happens on erev Shabbat when people are permitted to run to prepare for Shabbat? If one is chopping trees in one domain and the chips fly into another domain and injure, is the one chopping obligated? A braita compares a similar case with a store owner and someone walks into the store with/without permission. What is the difference in the ruling? Rabbi Yosi son of Rabbi Chanina said that one is obligated four types of payments for damages and is exempt from going to a refuge city. Was his statement qualifying the case in the braita where one was obligated or the case where one was exempt?

Bava Kamma 31 - December 3, 20 Kislev Dec 03, 2023

Show notes

Study Guide Bava Kamma 31

This week's learning is sponsored by Tova and David Kestenbaum in honor of the recent birth of their grandsons, Tsuri Amiad, born to their children Mira and Etan Kestenbaum, and Yehudah Shalom, born to their children Daniella and Amit Nistenpover. "May their parents merit raising them in the ways of Torah, Mitzvot and good deeds. And may this simcha be a blessing for Am Yisrael."

Today's daf is sponsored by the Hadran Women of Long Island in honor of Dora Chana Haar and Evie. "As we share in our Daf sister Dora Chana Haar and family's joy and gratitude as Evie (Chava Naami bat Daba Chana) completes her chemotherapy. May Evie, all cholei Yisrael and our brothers and sisters in captivity speedily experience רפואות וישועות!"

Bava Kamma 30 - Shabbat December 2, 19 Kislev Dec 01, 2023

Show notes

Study Guide Bava Kamma 30

If one spills water in public, the Mishna holds that person responsible for damages it incurs. Rav again limits this to damage to clothing, not to a person. If so, what does this Mishna add to the previous Mishna? What are the laws regarding one who conceals thorns or broken glass in their own wall? What if they conceal it in someone else's wall and the owner of the wall breaks it? If one wants to be pious, there is a debate about whether one should learn nezikin, avot or berakhot. If one lays out straw/hay in the public domain to create fertilizer, and it causes damage, one is liable for the damages and the rabbis penalized the one who put it out and declared it ownerless. However, there is a debate between tana kama and Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel and it is unclear what they disagree about. Can the Mishna be explained according to Rabbi Yehuda who seems to think that one can create fertilizer in the public domain? Does the fact that one is allowed to do something, remove the responsibility for damage it may cause? Rav and Zeiri disagree about whether the straw itself becomes ownerless or only the amount that it increased in value by turning into fertilizer. Is this a debate among tanaim as well? Is that the issue that the rabbis and Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel disagree about in our Mishna?

Our TOPPODCAST Picks

Follow Us

Stay Connected

Daf Yomi for Women – Hadran

Related Podcasts

Links

Stay Connected