AccueilÉtudeTanakhBibliothèqueSujetsParachaDivrei TorahRabbanimSagesHistoireÀ proposMes favorisFaire un don
Retour

Traité Bava Kamma

113a

Étude de Bava Kamma 113a

Étude de la Mishna & Guémara 113a

Traduction française en préparation — version anglaise (Steinsaltz) : But if the defendant is in the city, the court does not ostracize him for failing to respond to a summons conveyed through a woman or a neighbor, as we say: Perhaps they did not tell him of the court’s summons, as they said to themselves: Since the defendant is in the city, a court agent has already found him and told him. As a result, these unofficial messengers will not deliver the court’s summons to the defendant at all.
אֲבָל אִיתֵיהּ בְּמָתָא – לָא; דְּאָמְרִינַן: אֵימַר לָא אֲמַרוּ לֵיהּ, דְּאָמְרִי: (אַשְׁכְּחִינְהוּ) [אַשְׁכְּחֵיהּ] שְׁלִיחָא דְּבֵית דִּין, וַאֲמַר לֵיהּ.
Traduction française en préparation — version anglaise (Steinsaltz) : And similarly, we said that the court will ostracize one who does not respond to a summons conveyed through a woman or a neighbor only in a case where he does not pass by the court’s entrance on his way home, but if he does pass by the court’s entrance, the court does not ostracize him. This is because it is possible that the unofficial messengers will say to themselves: Since he passes by the courthouse, the court has already found him and told him.
וְלָא אֲמַרַן אֶלָּא דְּלָא חָלֵיף אַבָּבָא דְּבֵי דִּינָא, אֲבָל חָלֵיף אַבָּבָא דְּבֵי דִינָא – לָא; אָמְרִי: אַשְׁכְּחוּהּ בֵּי דִינָא, וְאָמְרִי לֵיהּ.
Traduction française en préparation — version anglaise (Steinsaltz) : And furthermore, we said that the court will ostracize one who does not respond to a summons only in a case where he comes home on the same day that the woman or neighbor is sent to deliver the court summons. But if he does not come home on the same day, he is not ostracized, because it is possible to say that they forgot to notify him.
וְלָא אֲמַרַן אֶלָּא דְּאָתֵי בְּיוֹמֵיהּ, אֲבָל לָא אָתֵי בְּיוֹמֵיהּ – לָא; אֵימָא אִישְׁתְּלוֹיֵי אִשְׁתְּלִי.
Traduction française en préparation — version anglaise (Steinsaltz) : Rava said: With regard to one who had a document of ostracism written about him due to the fact that he did not come to court, we do not tear up the document for him until he actually comes to court, and it is not enough for him to simply commit to appearing. Similarly, if the document of ostracism was written due to the fact that he did not obey the ruling of the court, we do not tear it up for him until he actually obeys the ruling. The Gemara comments: This second statement is not so. Rather, once he has acquiesced and said: I will obey, we immediately tear up the document for him.
אָמַר רָבָא: הַאי מַאן דִּכְתִיב עֲלֵיהּ פְּתִיחָא עַל דְּלָא אָתֵי לְדִינָא – עַד דְּאָתֵי לְדִינָא, לָא מְקָרְעִינַן לֵיהּ. עַל דְּלָא צָיֵית לְדִינָא – עַד דְּצָיֵית, לָא מְקָרְעִינַן לֵיהּ. וְלָא הִיא, כֵּיוָן דְּאָמַר: ״צָיֵיתְנָא״ – קָרְעִינַן לֵיהּ.
Traduction française en préparation — version anglaise (Steinsaltz) : Rav Ḥisda said: The court sets a date for an individual to appear in court on the upcoming Monday. And if he does not appear, they set a date for that Thursday, and if he does not appear, they set a date for the following Monday, so that he has a second date and then a third date after the first date. And if he does not appear in court by the third date, then on the next day we write a document of ostracism.
אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: קוֹבְעִים זְמַן שֵׁנִי וַחֲמִישִׁי וְשֵׁנִי – זִמְנָא וְזִמְנָא בָּתַר זִמְנָא, וּלְמָחָר כָּתְבִינַן.
Traduction française en préparation — version anglaise (Steinsaltz) : The Gemara relates that Rav Asi happened to come to the house of Rav Kahana. He saw that there was a certain woman whom Rav Kahana had summoned to appear in court in the evening, but she did not appear, and in the morning Rav Kahana wrote a document of ostracism concerning her. Rav Asi said to him: Does the Master not hold in accordance with that which Rav Ḥisda says, that the court sets a date for the coming Monday, and then Thursday, and then the following Monday before it issues a document of ostracism?
רַב אַסִּי אִיקְּלַע בֵּי רַב כָּהֲנָא. חֲזָא הָהִיא אִיתְּתָא דְּאַזְמְנַהּ לְדִינָא בְּפַנְיָא, וּבְצַפְרָא כְּתֻיב עֲלַהּ פְּתִיחָא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ, לָא סָבַר לַהּ מָר לְהָא דְּאָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: קוֹבְעִין זְמַן שֵׁנִי וַחֲמִישִׁי וְשֵׁנִי?
Traduction française en préparation — version anglaise (Steinsaltz) : Rav Kahana said to him: That matter applies only with regard to a man, as he is a victim of circumstance and is not always in the city due to his vocational activities. But in the case of a woman, since she is always in the city, when she does not come to court the first time she is immediately considered rebellious, and the court may issue a document of ostracism right away.
אֲמַר לֵיהּ: הָנֵי מִילֵּי גַּבְרָא, דַּאֲנִיס וְלֵיתֵיהּ בְּמָתָא; אֲבָל אִיתְּתָא, כֵּיוָן דְּאִיתַהּ בְּמָתָא וְלָא אָתְיָא – מוֹרֶדֶת הִיא.
Traduction française en préparation — version anglaise (Steinsaltz) : Continuing the discussion of court dates, Rav Yehuda says: The court does not set a date for legal proceedings during the days of Nisan, nor during the days of Tishrei, and also not on the eve of a Festival nor the eve of Shabbat because these are busy times. But during Nisan we may set a court date to take place after Nisan, and likewise, during Tishrei we may set a court date to take place after Tishrei. By contrast, on the eve of Shabbat we do not set a court date to take place after the eve of Shabbat. What is the reason for this? It is because one is preoccupied with his work in preparation for Shabbat and it is possible that he will forget about the court summons.
אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה: לָא (יָהֲבִינָא) [יָהֲבִינַן] זִמְנָא לָא בְּיוֹמֵי נִיסָן וְלָא בְּיוֹמֵי תִּשְׁרֵי, לָא בְּמַעֲלֵי יוֹמָא טָבָא וְלָא בְּמַעֲלֵי שַׁבְּתָא. אֲבָל מִנִּיסָן לְבָתַר יוֹמֵי נִיסָן, וּבְיוֹמֵי תִּשְׁרֵי לְבָתַר תִּשְׁרֵי – קָבְעִינַן. מִמַּעֲלֵי שַׁבְּתָא לְבָתַר מַעֲלֵי שַׁבְּתָא – לָא קָבְעִינַן. מַאי טַעְמָא? בַּעֲבִידְתֵּיהּ דְּשַׁבְּתָא טְרִיד.
Traduction française en préparation — version anglaise (Steinsaltz) : Rav Naḥman says: We do not set a court date for participants in the kalla, the gatherings for Torah study during Elul and Adar, during the months of the kalla, nor for participants in the public discourses prior to the Festival during the period leading up to the Festival. The Gemara relates: When people would come before Rav Naḥman during the kalla period in order to make legal claims against others, he would say to them: Did I gather you here for your own needs? No, I gathered you to participate in Torah study. The Gemara adds: But now that there are scoundrels, who do not come to study Torah but rather to avoid trial, we are concerned that they will continue to evade prosecution, and therefore we summon them to court even during these time periods.
אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן: לָא יָהֲבִינַן זִמְנָא לָא לִבְנֵי כַלָּה בְּכַלָּה, וְלָא לִבְנֵי רִיגְלָא בְּרִיגְלָא. כִּי הֲווֹ אָתוּ לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב נַחְמָן, אֲמַר לְהוּ: וְכִי לְדִידְכוּ כִּנּוּפַיְיכוּ?! וְהָאִידָּנָא דְּאִיכָּא רַמָּאֵי – חָיְישִׁינַן.
Traduction française en préparation — version anglaise (Steinsaltz) : § The mishna teaches, with regard to one who left a stolen item to his children, if the item was something that may serve as a legal guarantee of a loan, the heirs are obligated to pay the owner. The Gemara states that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi would teach this mishna to Rabbi Shimon, his son, and explain that it does not refer only to something that can actually serve as a guarantee for a loan, i.e., land. Rather, it refers even to a cow that he plows with, or a donkey that he drives by directing it from behind, which the heirs are obligated to return because of the honor of their father, so that people will not continually point out that the inheritance was stolen and thereby disgrace their deceased parent.
אִם הָיָה דְבַר שֶׁיֵּשׁ בּוֹ אַחְרָיוּת – חַיָּיב לְשַׁלֵּם. מַתְנֵי לֵיהּ רַבִּי לְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בְּרֵיהּ: לֹא דָּבָר שֶׁיֵּשׁ בּוֹ אַחְרָיוּת מַמָּשׁ, אֶלָּא אֲפִילּוּ פָּרָה וְחוֹרֵשׁ בָּהּ, חֲמוֹר וּמְחַמֵּר אַחֲרָיו – חַיָּיבִין לְהַחֲזִיר, מִפְּנֵי כְּבוֹד אֲבִיהֶן.
Traduction française en préparation — version anglaise (Steinsaltz) : Rav Kahana raises a dilemma before Rav: If the robber left his heirs a stolen item that is used in relative privacy, such as a bed that he lies on or a table upon which he eats, rather than something as conspicuous as a large animal, what is the halakha? Are the heirs obligated to return it to its owner? Rav said to him: “Give to a wise man, and he will be yet wiser” (Proverbs 9:9), meaning that from the fact that the heirs must return a cow and a donkey, one can infer that they must also return a bed and a table.
בָּעֵי מִינֵּיהּ רַב כָּהֲנָא מֵרַב: מִטָּה וּמֵיסֵב עָלֶיהָ, שׁוּלְחָן וְאוֹכֵל עָלָיו, מַהוּ? אָמַר לוֹ: ״תֵּן לְחָכָם וְיֶחְכַּם עוֹד״.
Mishna 1
Traduction française en préparation — version anglaise (Steinsaltz) : MISHNA: One may not exchange larger coins for smaller ones from the trunk of customs collectors nor from the purse of tax collectors, and one may not take charity from them, as they are assumed to have obtained their funds illegally. But one may take money from the collector’s house or from money he has with him in the market that he did not take from his collection trunk or purse.
מַתְנִי׳ אֵין פּוֹרְטִין לֹא מִתֵּיבַת הַמּוֹכְסִין, וְלֹא מִכִּיס שֶׁל גַּבָּאִין, וְאֵין נוֹטְלִין מֵהֶם צְדָקָה. אֲבָל נוֹטֵל הוּא מִתּוֹךְ בֵּיתוֹ אוֹ מִן הַשּׁוּק.(משנה)
Bava Kamma 113a
100%
בבא קמא קי״ג אמַסֶּכֶת בָּבָא קַמָּא