Bava Kamma 100b (ק:) — the Talmud in English

He says to him

“Fence it in.”

If the breach was made, he says to him: “Fence it in.”

If he despaired of it and did not fence it in —

it has thereby been sanctified

[it became forbidden as kilaayim]

and he is liable for it,”

yet there he did not perform an act directly; rather, he is liable under the law of dina de-garmei.

Mishna:

1.

One who gives wool to a dyer

who is a skilled craftsman who dyes wool, in order to have him dye it for him, and the wool was completely ruined on its own, unintentionally,

, and he overheated

the cauldron,

meaning that the dyer unintentionally caused the dye cauldron [the vessel in which the wool and dye are placed over the fire] to boil excessively, and the wool was completely burned in the cauldron,

he gives him the value of his wool,

since he damaged his fellow’s property.

2.

One who gives wool to a dyer, and

he dyed it unattractively

[like a blemish], meaning that the wool was not completely damaged, but was merely dyed in an unattractive manner. This is referring to a case where the dyer intentionally caused the damage by dyeing the wool with leftover dye rather than with the dye itself, and therefore the wool became unattractively dyed —

the dyer’s hand is on the lower footing. Therefore:

if the enhancement

that the dyer effected in the wool through his unattractive dyeing is

greater than the expense

[the cost of the outlay] that the dyer incurred for this dyeing, the owner of the wool does not pay the dyer his full wages [the amount he would receive as a dyer], despite the fact that the unattractive dyeing increased the value of the wool. Rather,

he gives him

only

the

cost of

the outlay,

and the owner of the wool takes the wool for himself, since the dyer did not acquire the wool for himself through the change he made in the wool. He dyed it with the dye specified by the owner of the wool; he merely dyed it unattractively, with the same type of dye specified by the owner. Therefore, he does not acquire the wool or the enhancement in its value.

But

on the other hand,

if the expense

is

greater than the enhancement,

the owner of the wool does not pay him even the cost of his outlay as wages. Rather,

he gives him

only

the

cost of

the enhancement

in the wool, and no more.

3.

One who gives wool to a dyer

to dye it for him

in the color

red, and he dyed it

in the color

black.

Or, he instructed him to dye it

black, and he dyed it red.

Rabbi Meir says:

By doing so, the dyer acquires the wool for himself, since he made a change in it contrary to the owner’s wishes. Therefore, the owner does not pay the dyer either his wages or the cost of the enhancement. Rather,

he gives him the value of his wool.

And if the owner of the wool wishes to receive his wool, he must pay the dyer his full wages.

Rabbi Yehuda says:

The Sages imposed a penalty upon the dyer for having deviated from the owner’s wishes, and established that the dyer’s hand is on the lower footing. Therefore, under all circumstances he does not receive his full wages, nor does he benefit from the enhancement. Rather, at most he receives his expenses, and it is possible that he will receive even less:

If the enhancement is greater than the expense, he gives him

the expense

alone, and not his wages

. But if the expense is greater than the enhancement,

the dyer does not receive even his expenses. Rather,

he gives him

the owner of the wool

the enhancement.

Gemara:

The Gemara explains the wording of the Mishna:

What does

“he dyed it”

“unattractively” mean?

Rav Naḥman said that Rabba bar bar Ḥana said:

“Unattractively” means

“kalbus.”

What is “kalbus”?

Rabba bar Shmuel said: