הכא נמי, תני: אדם – שמירת גופו עליו.
here too, teach the Mishnah: And with regard to man, responsibility for safeguarding his body is incumbent upon him.
Study Bava Kamma folio 4B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
הכא נמי, תני: אדם – שמירת גופו עליו.
here too, teach the Mishnah: And with regard to man, responsibility for safeguarding his body is incumbent upon him.
מתקיף לה רב מרי, ואימא ״מבעה״ זה המים, כדכתיב: ״כקדח אש המסים, מים תבעה אש״! מי כתיב ״מים נבעו״?! ״תבעה אש״ כתיב.
§ Rav Mari objects to the Talmud’s initial suggestion that the dispute between Rav and Shmuel with regard to the meaning of Maveh is based on biblical terms with similar etymology. He suggests: But why not say that Maveh, this is the primary category of damage caused by water, as it is written: “As when fire ignites brushwood; fire boils [tiveh] water” (Isaiah 64:1). The terms tiveh and maveh share a common root, and the reference is to water. The Talmud rejects this: Is it written in the verse: Water boils [nivu] from fire, with water, a plural noun in Hebrew, the subject of the intransitive plural verb, nivu? No, “fire boils [tiveh] water” is written, and since tiveh is a transitive singular verb, the subject is fire, which is a singular noun. Therefore, no proof can be adduced from this verse that Maveh refers to an action performed with water.
מתקיף לה רב זביד: ואימא ״מבעה״ זה האש, דכי כתיב ״תבעה״ – באש הוא דכתיב! אי הכי, מאי ״המבעה וההבער״? וכי תימא פרושי קמפרש; אי הכי, ארבעה?! שלשה הוו!
Rav Zevid objects to the Talmud’s initial suggestion that the dispute between Rav and Shmuel with regard to the meaning of Maveh is based on biblical terms with similar etymology. He suggests: But why not say that Maveh, this is the primary category of Fire, as when the term “tiveh” is written in the verse cited by Rav Mari, it is written with regard to Fire. The Talmud rejects this: If so, what is the meaning when the Mishnah enumerates the primary categories of damage: The category of Maveh and the category of Fire, indicating that they are two distinct categories? And if you would say that these are not two distinct categories but rather the Mishnah is explaining the meaning of Maveh, if so, why does the Mishnah say: There are 4 primary categories of damage? There are only 3.
Text data via Sefaria: William Davidson Edition - English and William Davidson Edition - Vocalized Aramaic, CC-BY-NC; edition provenance: Koren. Display terminology has been modernized for readability.