More Discussions for this daf
1. Relationship between Machlokes of Rebbi Yishmael/Rebbi Akiva (33b) with Machlokes of Rebbi Meir/Rebbi Yehudah (34a) 2. Apotiki 3. Clarifying the Outline of the Daf- Half The Decrease
4. הערה ברש"י לענין שבת
DAF DISCUSSIONS - BAVA KAMA 34

Dovid Gottlieb asks:

You write

(j)Question (R. Acha bar Tachlifa): If so, R. Yehudah (has no source that the damager pays half the decrease due to the goring. Rather, we sell both and split the money, even when the damager is worth more than the victim. If so, he) holds that a Tam sometimes pays more than half- damage. However, it says "they will sell the live ox and split the money" (and R. Yehudah (37a) agrees that it pays half-damage)!

(k)Answer (Rava): No. R. Yehudah agrees that the victim gets half the decrease in value.

"No" what? - what in the previous information is being rejected? How does agreeing that the victim gets half the decrease answer the question?

Dovid Gottlieb, Jerusalem, Israel

The Kollel replies:

R. Acha asked that if R. Yehudah does not expound that the damager pays half the decrease due to the goring, he must explain the verse simply, that in every case we sell both and split the money, even when the damager is worth more than the victim. If so, a Tam sometimes pays more than half- damage!

Rava answered that R. Yehudah agrees that we expound that the damager pays (so the victim gets) half the decrease in value. He also expounds that

the damager shares increased value of the carcass (i.e. it is deducted from what he pays).

Kollel Iyun Hadaf