Study Bava Kamma folio 10B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
אי דבלאו איהו לא אזלא – פשיטא! אלא דבלאו איהו אזלא – מאי קא עביד?
If the fire would not have spread to another person’s field without him adding bundles the fire, it is obvious that he alone is liable for the damage because he alone did everything that led to the damage. Rather, the case must be one where the fire would have spread even without him. The Talmud asks: But if that is the case, what did he do by adding bundles of wood? The fire would have spread without him, so he did not cause even part of the damage. It is apparent, then, that the Mishnah is not referring to this case.
מתקיף לה רב פפא, והא איכא הא דתניא: חמשה שישבו על ספסל אחד ולא שברוהו, ובא אחד וישב עליו ושברו – האחרון חייב. ואמר רב פפא: כגון פפא בר אבא.
Rav Pappa objects to the claim of the baraita that the Mishnah refers only to one specific case: But isn’t there also that which is taught in a baraita: With regard to a case in which 5 people were sitting on one bench [safsal] and it did not break, and then one additional person came and sat upon it and broke it with his added weight, the latter individual is liable for all the damage. And Rav Pappa said by way of clarification that this applies in a case where the last individual to sit down was as heavy as Pappa bar Abba. Since he could have potentially broken it even on his own, he had no right to use it. In this case, even though the weight of the first 5 individuals was presumably a contributing factor in causing the damage, since the damage was ultimately caused by the additional weight of the last individual, he is liable for all of the damage. Seemingly, this is an additional example of the Mishnah’s principle, and the baraita should have mentioned it.