Study Bava Kamma folio 16B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
R' Elazar says: Also the snake. By using the term also, R' Elazar suggests he considers a snake to be forewarned to the same extent as the other animals in the Mishnah’s list, which, according to his opinion, are not considered to be forewarned if they are domesticated. The Talmud asks: But didn’t
The Talmud answers: Emend and teach the baraita as saying that R' Elazar says: A snake, instead of saying: Also a snake. Accordingly, the baraita is teaching that he holds that only a snake is considered to be forewarned under all circumstances because he holds that even if it is domesticated it is
§ The Talmud considers cases of damage caused by a lion: Shmuel says: With regard to a lion that kills an animal in the public domain, if it clawed its prey and ate it, the lion’s owner is exempt from liability. But if it first tore apart its prey with its teeth in order to kill it, and only then
The Talmud elucidates: If it clawed its prey and ate it, the owner is exempt, since it is its typical manner to claw its prey and eat it, and it is therefore equivalent to the case of an animal that eats fruit and vegetables belonging to someone else. Therefore, it is classified as Eating done in a
The Talmud asks: Is this to say that tearing apart its prey is not the typical manner of a lion? But isn’t it written: “The lion tears apart for its young, and it strangles for its lionesses, and it fills its caves with prey, and its den with that which was torn apart” (Nahum 2:13). The description