Study Bava Kamma folio 48B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
In a case of two people who were both somewhere with permission, or two people who were both somewhere without permission, if they injure each other directly, they are both liable. If they were injured by one another through stumbling over one another, they are exempt. From this statement, it may
§ The Mishnah teaches: If the ox that he brought into the courtyard without permission fell into the owner’s pit and contaminated its water, the owner of the ox is liable. Rava says: They taught this halakha only in a case where the ox contaminated the water at the time of the fall. But if it conta
The Talmud asks: This works out well according to the opinion of Shmuel, who says: Any obstruction is categorized as Pit, and the same halakha exempting the one responsible for the pit from damage to utensils applies to them as well. But according to the opinion of Rav, who says that one’s property
Rather, if this statement was stated, it was stated like this: Rava says that they taught this halakha only in the case where the ox contaminated the water with its body, i.e., its carcass. But if it contaminated the water with its stench, the owner is exempt. What is the reason? It is because th
§ The Mishnah teaches: If the homeowner’s father or son were inside the pit at the time the ox fell and the person died as a result, the owner of the ox pays the ransom. The Talmud asks: But why does he pay a ransom? Isn’t the ox innocuous, in which case its owner is not liable to pay a ransom? Ra