Bava Kamma - Daf 61
- The exemption of fire which crosses barriers, קולחת vs. נכפפת
The next Mishnah states: עברה גדר שהוא גבוה ד' אמות – If a fire which one lit in his own property crossed a wall four amos high, או דרך הרבים או נהר – or a public road, or a river, פטור – he is exempt. The Gemara explains that this reflects Rebbe Eliezer’s opinion in the next Mishnah, that a space the width of a “public road” (i.e., sixteen amos) is a sufficient barrier for exemption on a fire. Rav says this exemption only applies בקולחת – with a rising fire, אבל בנכפפת – but regarding a bent fire (bent by the wind), אפילו עד מאה אמה חייב – he is liable even up to a hundred amos. Shmuel says: מתני' בנכפפת – The exemption of our Mishnah refers to a bent fire, אבל בקולחת אפי' כל שהוא פטור – but regarding a rising fire, even with a minimal barrier, he is exempt. A Baraisa supports Rav’s view.
- Rebbe Shimon: הכל לפי הדליקה
The next Mishnah states: המדליק בתוך שלו – If one lights a fire within his own property, עד כמה תעבור הדליקה – until how far is the fire expected to pass? Four opinions are recorded: (1) Rebbe Elazar ben Azaryah says half of a beis kor. (2) Rebbe Eliezer says sixteen amos, the width of רשות הרבים (the opinion quoted in the previous Mishnah). (3) Rebbe Akiva says fifty amos. (4) Rebbe Shimon says, based on a passuk: הכל לפי הדליקה – it all depends on the fire. The Gemara assumes Rebbe Shimon means he is liable no matter how far the fire traveled. This contradicts his ruling in another Mishnah, which requires an oven built into one’s house to have four amos of space above it, and an upper story must have three tefachim of plaster underneath. The Tanna Kamma says he would still be liable for any damages, but Rebbe Shimon says: לא נאמרו שיעורין הללו אלא שאם הזיק פטור מלשלם – these measurements were only said such that if it damaged, he is exempt. Rather, Rebbe Shimon is explained: הכל לפי גובה הדליקה – it all depends on the height of the fire, which determines how far the fire is expected to travel. Shmuel says the halachah is like Rebbe Shimon
- The machlokes of טמון באש, and its application regarding מדליק בתוך של חבירו
The next Mishnah teaches that if one burned a pile of barley and there were utensils inside, Rebbe Yehudah says he pays for them, and the Chachomim say he only pays for the space as if it was barley. The Mishnah concludes that if one sets fire to someone’s large tower (and lit the fire in the victim’s property), the Chachomim agree he pays for hidden items, שכן דרך בני אדם להניח בבתים – because it is the way of people to put things in houses. Rav Kahana suggests this machlokes is only where one lit a fire in his own property and it spread, but if he lit it in someone else’s property, all would agree he pays for hidden items. Rava disproves this from the final clause of the Mishnah, and says they argue about both cases. Where one set a fire in his property, the Chachomim say he is exempt on all hidden items. Where he lit in another’s property, Rebbe Yehudah holds him liable even for an ארנקי – a purse (not commonly hidden in grain), and the Chachomim say: כלים שדרכן להטמין בגדיש – for utensils commonly hidden in a grain pile, such as threshing tools, he is liable, but not for items not commonly hidden there.
