Bava Kamma - Daf 55
- Why "טוב" only appears in the second version of עשרת הדברות, and הרואה ט"ת בחלום
Rebbe Chanina ben Agil asked Rebbe Chiya bar Abba: why does the word "טוב" – good only appear in the second version of the עשרת הדברות, and not in the first? He replied: עד שאתה שואלני למה נאמר בהם טוב – “Before you ask me why “good” is mentioned there, שאלני אם נאמר בהן טוב אם לאו – ask me if “good” is mentioned there or not, because I do not know.” He sent him to Rebbe Tanchum bar Chanilai, who quoted Shmuel bar Nachum’s answer: הואיל וסופן להשתבר – because they were destined to be shattered, which Rav Ashi explained would indicate: חס ושלום פסקה טובה מישראל – Heaven forbid, goodness has ceased from Yisroel. Rebbe Yehoshua said: הרואה טי"ת בחלומו סימן יפה לו – If one sees the letter tes in his dream, it is a good sign for him. The Gemara ultimately explains: הואיל ופתח בו הכתוב לטובה תחילה – because the Torah began using [the letter tes] for goodness, because its first appearance is when describing light as "טוב" – good.
- Kilayim of sea creatures, and a wagon pulled together by a goat and fish
Rebbe Yirmiyah told Reish Lakish: המרביע שני מינים שבים לוקה – One who mates two species of the sea incurs malkos. Ulla explained that a gezeirah shavah (למינהו למינהו) teaches to apply kilayim to sea creatures. Rechavah asked: המנהיג בעיזא ושיבוטא מהו – One who leads a wagon by means of a goat and a shibbuta fish pulling it, what is the halachah? Do we say that since the goat cannot go into the sea, and the fish cannot go onto dry land, he has not done anything prohibited (because they are inherently separate), or since they drew the wagon, he violated the kilayim prohibition? Ravina challenged the possibility of considering this kilayim, because if so, if one would plant a wheat grain just inside Eretz Yisroel and a barley grain next to it, just outside Eretz Yisroel, could he possibly be liable for kilayim?! The Gemara responds that it is not analogous, because outside Eretz Yisroel, kilayim does not apply whatsoever, whereas in Rechavah’s inquiry, both the land and the sea are places of potential kilayim prohibitions.
- נעל בפניו כראוי: the requisite שמירה for שן ורגל
The sixth Perek begins: הכונס צאן לדיר – One who brought a sheep into a shed, ונעל בפניה כראוי – and locked the opening before it properly, ויצאה והזיקה פטור – but it escaped and damaged someone’s property, he is exempt. If it was not properly locked, he is liable. A Baraisa defines a “proper” locking as: דלת שיכולה לעמוד ברוח מצויה – a door which can withstand a normal wind. This level of protection is considered "שמירה פחותה" – lesser guarding. Since the Mishnah is discussing shein and regel (a sheep’s damages), for which animals are always mu’ad, Rav Masnah says the Mishnah follows the opinion of Rebbe Yehudah (on Daf 45b), that lesser guarding is adequate to exempt oneself from a mu’ad’s damages. The Gemara responds that the Mishnah can be unanimous: שאני שן ורגל דהתורה מיעטה בשמירתן – shein and regel are different, because the Torah reduced their required guarding. The Gemara quotes pesukim teaching that the damages of a pit, fire, shein, and regel are all exempt with a basic guarding. Rabbah supports this interpretation of the Mishnah by pointing out that the mesechta has been consistently discussing oxen, and here switched to sheep, because the ruling only applies to shein and regel, and not keren.
