Study Bava Kamma folio 16B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
רבי אלעזר אומר: אף הנחש. והא אנן תנן, רבי אלעזר אומר: בזמן שהן בני תרבות – אינן מועדים; והנחש מועד לעולם!
R' Elazar says: Also the snake. By using the term also, R' Elazar suggests he considers a snake to be forewarned to the same extent as the other animals in the Mishnah’s list, which, according to his opinion, are not considered to be forewarned if they are domesticated. The Talmud asks: But didn’t we learn in the Mishnah: R' Elazar says: When these animals are domesticated they are not considered to be forewarned, but the snake is always considered forewarned?
תני: נחש.
The Talmud answers: Emend and teach the baraita as saying that R' Elazar says: A snake, instead of saying: Also a snake. Accordingly, the baraita is teaching that he holds that only a snake is considered to be forewarned under all circumstances because he holds that even if it is domesticated it is still prone to cause damage.
§ The Talmud considers cases of damage caused by a lion: Shmuel says: With regard to a lion that kills an animal in the public domain, if it clawed its prey and ate it, the lion’s owner is exempt from liability. But if it first tore apart its prey with its teeth in order to kill it, and only then ate it, the owner is liable for the damage.
The Talmud elucidates: If it clawed its prey and ate it, the owner is exempt, since it is its typical manner to claw its prey and eat it, and it is therefore equivalent to the case of an animal that eats fruit and vegetables belonging to someone else. Therefore, it is classified as Eating done in a public domain, and the owner of the lion is exempt. But if the lion first tore apart its prey to kill it, since this is not its typical manner, the act is classified as Goring, for which an owner is liable even in a public thoroughfare.