KING DAVID'S QUESTION (cont.)
Question: According to Rav Huna and Rabanan, we understand "David did not want to drink" (to rely on the special right of a king).
According to Rava what does this mean? (He merely received an answer!)
Answer: He would not say the law in their names.
David had received from Shmuel that we do not say laws in the name of one who endangered his life to learn Torah.
Question: According to Rav Huna and Rabanan, we understand "he poured them for an offering to Hash-m" - he acted for the sake of Heaven (he did not rely on the special right of a king);
According to Rava, what does this mean?
Answer: He said the law (anonymously) like a tradition.
A FIRE THAT SPREAD [line 14]
(Mishnah): If a fire passed a wall of four Amos, Derech ha'Rabim (a public road) or a river, one is exempt (for what burned on the other side).
(Gemara) Contradiction (Beraisa): If a fire passed a wall of four Amos, he is liable.
Answer (Rav Papa): The Mishnah teaches about walls of descending heights. If the wall was six Amos, he is exempt, and also if it was five, until (and including) four;
The Beraisa teaches about walls of ascending heights. If the wall was two Amos, he is liable, and also if it was three, until (but not including) four.
(Rava): A wall of four Amos exempts, even in a field of thorns.
(Rav Papa): The four Amos are measured above the thorns.
(Rav): The Mishnah applies only to a flame that rises. A low (or bent) flame is liable even for crossing a wall (Tosfos; Rashi - road) of 100 Amos.
(Shmuel): The Mishnah applies only to a low (or bent) flame. A flame that rises is exempt even for crossing a wall (road) of any size.
Support (for Rav - Beraisa): This applies only to a flame that rises. A low (or bent) flame where wood is found is liable even for crossing a road of 100 Mil (one Mil is 2000 Amos, about a kilometer);
If it crossed a river or Shlulis (explained below) eight Amos wide, it is exempt.
(Mishnah): If it crossed Derech ha'Rabim...
Question: Who is the Tana of the Mishnah?
Answer (Rava): It is R. Eliezer.
(Beraisa - R. Eliezer): (One is exempt if it crossed a road) 16 Amos wife, like the width of Reshus ha'Rabim.
(Mishnah): Or a river...
(Rav): This literally means a river.
Even if it is dry, he is exempt.
(Shmuel): It refers to a small irrigation ditch.
He is exempt only if has water.
(Mishnah): The following are a division regarding Pe'ah (they require one to leave a part of the field unharvested (for the poor) on each side of the division): a Nachal (river; some say, valley), a Shlulis, a private path, or a public road.
Question: What is a Shlulis?
Answer #1 (Rav Yehudah): It is a place where rainwater Sholelim (gathers).
Answer #2 (Rav Bivi): It is an irrigation ditch that apportions Shalal (profit) to its banks (by supplying water).
Rav Yehudah would say that all the more so, an irrigation ditch is a division;
Rav Bivi would not agree about a place where rainwater gathers. That is a mere basin of the field.
THE LIMIT OF RESPONSIBILITY [line 1]
(Mishnah) Question: If Reuven lit a fire in his own premises (and it spread to his neighbor), how far must it be from the fire to his neighbor for Reuven to be exempt?
Answer #1 (R. Elazar ben Azaryah): It must be like the distance from the middle of a Beis Kor (to the edge, about 137 Amos);
Answer #2 (R. Eliezer): It must be 16 Amos, like Reshus ha'Rabim;
Answer #3 (R. Akiva): It must be 50 Amos;
Answer #4 (R. Shimon): "The one who burned the fire will pay" - it is according to the fire.
(Gemara) Contradiction: Elsewhere, R. Shimon limits responsibility for a fire!
(Mishnah): One may not set up a Tanur (oven) in his house unless there are four Amos above it. One may not set up an oven in an upper story unless there are three Tefachim of plaster below it;
For a Kirah (a kind of oven that does not get as hot as a Tanur), one Tefach suffices.
If the oven caused damage, he must pay for it;
R. Shimon says, if he kept the proper distance, he is exempt.
Answer (Rav Nachman): R. Shimon holds that the distance is always according to the size of the fire.
(Rav Yosef): The Halachah follows R. Shimon.
LIABILITY FOR SOMETHING CONCEALED [line 17]
(Mishnah - R. Yehudah): If Reuven burned a stack, and Kelim were inside and they burned, he pays for them;
Chachamim say, he only pays for a stack of wheat or barley (whatever it was).
If Reuven burned a stack of grain, and there was a goat tied to it and a slave nearby, and they were burned, Reuven is liable;
If there was a slave tied to it and a goat nearby, and they were burned, Reuven is exempt.
Chachamim admit to R. Yehudah that one who burns a building pays for everything inside, for people normally put (all kinds of) things in houses.
(Gemara - Rav Kahana): They argue about when Reuven lit in his own premises, and it spread to Shimon's property: R. Yehudah obligates him for what was hidden, and Chachamim exempt him;
If he lit a fire in Shimon's premises, all obligate him for what was hidden.
Objection (Rava): If so, why does the Seifa say 'Chachamim admit to R. Yehudah that one who burns a building pays for everything inside, for people normally hide things away in houses?' It should distinguish regarding the case of a stack!
It should say that Chachamim exempt only when Reuven lit in his own premises. If he lit in Shimon's premises, all agree he is liable for what was hidden!
(Rava): Rather, they argue in both cases;
When Reuven lit in his own premises and it spread to Shimon's property, R. Yehudah obligates him for what was hidden, and Chachamim exempt him;
If he lit a fire in Shimon's premises, R. Yehudah obligates even for anything hidden, even a wallet. Chachamim obligate for Kelim that are sometimes put in a stack, such as tools used for threshing and with cattle.
(Beraisa - R. Yehudah): If Reuven burned a stack, and Kelim were inside and they burned, he pays for them;
Chachamim say, he pays only for a stack of wheat or barley. We view the place of the Kelim as if it were grain.