Series: Daf Yomi

Venue: Jerusalem Jerusalem

Gemara:

Bava Kamma 

Halacha:

Choshen Mishpat,  Nezikin 

Collections: R' Berzon Daf Yomi Baba Kama

References: Bava Kamma: 63a ,  Bava Kamma: 63b  

Description

For Bava Kamma 63a-b we continue our study of the thief who pays כפל and the Shomer Chinam who swore the object was stolen & then witnesses testified that the Shomer himself stole the object. In both cases there is a payment of כפל. But are these two presented by the Torah in two sections, or is the section dedicated exclusively to the case of the Shomer & the classical thief is derived from the Shomer with a Kal VaChomer? The sugya rejects the latter option by virtue of the rule of דיו; after all the Shomer pays if & when he takes a false oath. How then can we derive the classical גנב who took no oath at all? Furthermore, if the entire Parsha refers to the Shomer scenario why the necessity for two verses addressing the very same case?