Bava Kamma 81b (פא:) — the Talmud in English

Only from a place that does not see the sun,

and not from a place that sees the sun

(exact column location)

and not from a place that sees the sun

, because that is the principal part of the tree, where the sun ripens the fruit and sweetens it,

as it is stated

[Deuteronomy 33:13]: “And concerning Joseph he said: Blessed by the Lord is his land ...

and with the choicest

[a term denoting delicacies and sweetness]

of the produce of the sun

[for his land was open to the sun, which sweetened the fruits].”

e.

And regarding a spring that emerges first, the townspeople may draw water from it:

Rabba bar Rav Huna said: And he gives him

—the one who draws water from it gives the owner of the spring—

money.

But

the halakha does not follow him

—Rabba bar Rav Huna—and he need not pay him.

v.

And one may fish in the Sea of Tiberias, provided that one does not spread a seine and anchor a boat:

The Sages taught: At first

the tribes stipulated with one another that one may not spread a seine and anchor a boat, but one may fish with nets and dragnets.

Trees

that had been detached

that

were

in the mountains

at the time the land was divided,

are considered to be in the possession of all the tribes, even though they are located in the portion of one particular tribe.

And there is no tribe among the tribes of Israel that does not have a portion in the mountain, in the lowland, and in the Negev

[a land of fields and valleys],

and in the valley

, meaning: This is how the land was divided, so that each tribe’s portion contained some of all these types of terrain—

as it is stated: “Turn and journey for yourselves, and come to the mountain of the Amorite and to all its neighbors, in the Arabah, in the mountain, in the lowland, in the Negev, and on the seacoast.”

And it was not only the mountain of the Amorite that contained all these types of terrain;

and so you find

also

among the Canaanite and the Perizzite

as it is stated

: “And come to the mountain of the Amorite

and to all its neighbors

apparently

even

its neighbors

—of the Amorite—

were likewise

[that is what they had].

z.

And one may relieve oneself behind a fence, even in a field full of saffron:

Rav Aḥa bar Ya'akov said: This enactment was necessary only

for this enactment,

but

if one relieves himself behind the fence of another person’s field, he may

take from it

—from the fence built around his fellow’s field—

a stone

to use for cleaning himself, even though he breaches the fence, and even though the field is full of saffron, which requires especially careful protection.

Rav Ḥisda said: Even on Shabbat

it is permitted to take a stone from a built fence for use in cleaning oneself.

On Shabbat

and returned it

[he would take the stone and return it],

and he said to his attendant: “Go, plaster it”

[and he would tell his attendant during the week to spread mortar over it and attach it securely to the fence].

h.

And one may walk along the paths between the fields until the second rainfall descends:

Rav Pappa said: But this

field, ours, is harmed even by dew, [that is, my field is harmed by people walking on it the next day even if only dew fell on it at night], and not only after the second rainfall descends.

t.

And one withdraws to the sides of the roads because of the road stakes:

There was an incident involving

Shmuel and Rav Yehuda

who

were traveling along the road, and Shmuel would withdraw to the sides of the roads

[There was an incident involving Shmuel and Rav Yehuda, who were traveling along a road in Babylonia. The road was filled with stakes, and Shmuel walked through the fields alongside the roads].

Rav Yehuda said to him

to Shmuel:

But are the

stipulations that Joshua made—even in Babylonia

applicable!?

He said to him: I maintain

that the stipulations Joshua made

were made even outside Eretz Yisrael, and all the more so in Babylonia, where caravans and travelers are common, and Joshua needed to make such a stipulation.

, and certainly in Babylonia, where caravans and passersby are common and Joshua needed to stipulate.

There was an incident involving

Rabbi and Rabbi Ḥiyya, who were traveling along the road; they withdrew to the sides of the roads, while Rabbi Yehuda ben Kenosa was striding before them

[There was an incident involving Rabbi and Rabbi Ḥiyya. There were stakes in the road, and they therefore walked through the fields alongside the roads, whereas Rabbi Yehuda ben Kenosa, who was walking ahead of them, took large strides from one stake to the next and did not walk along the sides of the road].

Rabbi said to Rabbi Ḥiyya:

Who is

this one who displays greatness before us!?

For he is showing us that he is exceedingly God-fearing and does not concern himself with the stipulation Joshua made, and this appears to be presumptuous piety.

Rabbi Ḥiyya said to him: Perhaps he is Rabbi Yehuda ben Kenosa, my student, and all his deeds are for the sake of Heaven.

When they reached him, he saw him

[When Rabbi and Rabbi Ḥiyya proceeded and reached Rabbi Yehuda ben Kenosa, Rabbi saw him and]

said to him:

If you were not Yehuda ben Kenosa

—whose every deed is for the sake of Heaven—

I would cut off your legs with an iron ax

[If you were not Yehuda ben Kenosa, I would cut off your feet with an ax

of iron], meaning: I would impose a ban upon you.

j.

The one who loses his way among vineyards cuts through and ascends, cuts through and descends:

The Sages taught: One who sees

his

fellow

lost among vineyards,

and wishes to guide him out, may

cut through,

clearing a path for him through the vineyard while breaking branches from the grapevines,

and ascend

into the vineyard, and from the vineyard he

cuts through and descends

into the vineyard, and from the vineyard,

until he brings him

the lost person

to the city or to the road.

And so too he

himself

who is lost among vineyards may cut through

on his own

and ascend; he may cut through

on his own

and descend, until he reaches the city or the road.

And we challenge this:

What is the meaning of

“and so

too he himself”? Why must it teach us that he himself may do this, since it has already taught us that another may do this for him!?

And we answer: The tanna teaches that he himself may also do this because

it might enter your mind

that only

his fellow

of the lost person

is

permitted to cut through the vineyard in order to save his lost fellow, since

he

knows

where he is exiting, and therefore he cuts through. The one saving his fellow does not cause extensive damage to the vineyard, since he knows the route and cuts through only in the direction of the exit.

But he

himself, who is lost among the vineyards,

does not know where he is emerging,

and does not know where he is going out;

he should not cut through

within the vineyards themselves, since he will walk through them extensively in different directions without knowing the direction of the exit, causing them substantial damage. Rather,

he should return and go along the boundaries,

walking on the paths between the vineyard fences, around the boundaries of the vineyards, and not cutting through the vineyards.

It teaches us

that even the person who is himself lost may cut through and ascend and cut through and descend within the vineyards themselves.

And we raise a difficulty:

This permission to cut through vineyards in order to save or be saved—is it not

the law of

the Torah

? Since the owner of the vineyard himself is obligated to save him even at the cost of damage to his vineyard, why did the beraita include this halakha among Joshua’s enactments!?

As it is taught:

One might have thought that a person is obligated only to restore his fellow’s property;

the restoration of his fellow’s body

—

from where

do we know that he is obligated?

The verse states

in the passage concerning the return of lost property [Deuteronomy 22:2]: “And if your brother is not near you, and you do not know him, then you shall gather it into your house, and it shall remain with you until your brother seeks it,

and you shall restore it

to him,” which implies: You shall restore him himself.

And we answer:

By Torah law

one may be saved only by walking along the paths found

between the boundaries

between the boundaries of the vineyards, around the vineyard, but not within the vineyard, because the Torah did not permit a person to be saved at the expense of the vineyard’s owner when he can take the trouble to go around the vineyard from the outside and be saved without causing the owner a loss.

He came,

[Joshua came] and

enacted that

he is even permitted to

cut through and ascend, cut through and descend

for the purpose of saving himself.

11.

And a met mitzva acquires its place:

And we raise a contradiction

from that which is taught:

One who finds a

met mitzva lying on a public thoroughfare

[a public domain sixteen cubits wide]

moves it to the right side of the thoroughfare or to the left side of the thoroughfare.

And if there were there

a barren field

[a field that was neither plowed nor sown] on the right of the roadway,

and a fallow field

[a field that was plowed but not sown] on the left of the roadway, he

directs him to the barren field.

And if there were there

a fallow field and a sown field

[a field that was sown] on both sides of the roadway, he

directs him to the fallow field.

And if

both were barren fields, or if

they were

both

fallow fields, or if

they were

both sown fields, he directs him wherever he wishes.

That is, to whichever of them he wishes.

It is therefore apparent that a met mitzva does not acquire its place, for if it did, the owners of the fields on the right and left would prevent him from burying it in their fields; rather, he would bury it where they found it, on the roadway!

Rav Bibi said:

The beraita is speaking

of a corpse lying

the corpse

across the boundary

[across the width of the public domain], so that when people pass over it, those preparing objects of ritual purity cast a tent over it and become impure. Therefore,

since permission was granted

to

move it from its place so that it would not render those passing there impure,

therefore

he directs it wherever he wishes,

in whichever direction he wishes.

The Master said: “Joshua stipulated ten conditions.”

The members of the academy said to raise a difficulty:

Were there only

ten

conditions? But

these are eleven

[according to the way they were enumerated, these are eleven conditions], so why did we learn that there were ten conditions!?

And we answer: The eighth condition, “

They may walk on the paths through private property,”

was stated by Solomon

the king,

not by Joshua

!

As it is taught in a beraita: If one’s produce has already been completely harvested from the field, and

nevertheless

he does not allow people to enter his field, what do people say about him: What benefit does so-and-so derive, and what harm are people causing him!?

And concerning him the verse says: “

Rather than being good, do not be called evil.”

And we ask:

And is it written: “

Rather than being good, do not be called evil”

? [Is such a verse written?] And we answer:

Yes—

indeed

it is written in a similar form: “

Do not withhold good from its rightful owner, when you have the power to act.”

And we ask:

And are there no more

[are there no further conditions of Joshua besides those mentioned here]!?

But there is

the matter

of

Rabbi Yehuda!?

As it is taught in a beraita: Rabbi Yehuda says:

During the season for removing manure, a person may take his manure out into the public domain and pile it

there

for thirty days,

that is, he is permitted to leave it there for thirty days,

so that it will be trampled under the feet of people and the feet of animals

[and through this the manure will be fit for fertilizing the field],

because Joshua gave the Land to Israel on this condition.

And

likewise,

there is

also the matter

of Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yohanan ben Beroka.

As it is taught in a beraita: Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yohanan ben Beroka, says:

a.

It is a stipulation of the court: that this person

the owner of a swarm of bees, which the bees abandoned and settled in the field of another

may enter his fellow’s field and cut off his branch

[a branch of his tree]

belonging to his fellow

on which his bees are sitting, in order

to save the swarm

the bees

belonging to him, which settled on it, since when he cuts it off, the bees will return to him.

And he gives him

the owner of the swarm gives the owner of the tree

the

value of his fellow’s branch.

b.

And

likewise,

it is a stipulation of the court: that this person shall pour out

his

wine

and empty his barrel

and rescue

into the barrel

his fellow’s

honey, whose barrel has cracked,

and he takes

the owner of the wine takes

the

value of his wine

which he lost

from his fellow’s honey.

c.

And

likewise,

it is a stipulation of the court that this person—the owner of a donkey laden with wood—

unloads his wood

from his donkey

and loads

onto it

his fellow’s

flax, whose donkey has died,

and he takes the value of his wood from his fellow’s flax—

And all these are because

Joshua gave the Land to Israel on this condition.

And now the difficulty arises: Why were neither the stipulations of Rabbi Yehuda nor those of Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yohanan ben Beroka, enumerated as well!?

And we answer:

We do not state this with regard to individual opinions

[the opinion of an individual is not counted in this beraita], and the statements of Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Yishmael are individual opinions, as the Sages disagreed with them.