If the baby landed on the horns of an ox and died, R. Yishmael (son of R. Yochanan ben Berokah) and Chachamim argue about whether or not the owner pays Kofer.

(Beraisa): "He will give redemption of his soul" - the value of the victim (here, since the baby was destined to die, he has no value, so there is no Kofer);

R. Yishmael says, the owner of the ox pays his own value (so he pays Kofer).

(Rabah): If a man fell off a roof (in a normal wind) and landed on a woman, he pays four damages. If she was his Yevamah (and he had Bi'ah due to the fall), he does not acquire her.

He pays Nezek, pain, medical expenses and temporary Sheves, but not embarrassment.

(Mishnah): One pays for embarrassment only if he intended to damage.

(Rabah): If one fell off a roof in an abnormal wind and damaged, he pays Nezek, but not the four damages. If he fell in a normal wind, he pays four damages, but is exempt for embarrassment;

If he turned (in midair to land on the person), he is liable even for embarrassment.

(Beraisa): Obviously, "she stuck out her hand" to grab (the private parts of the man fighting her husband)! It says "and grabbed" to teach that intent to damage obligates payment for embarrassment, even without intent to embarrass.

(Rabah): If Reuven put a coal on Shimon's heart, and Shimon died from it, Reuven is exempt (because Shimon should have removed it).

If he put it on Shimon's clothing and they were burned, Reuven is liable.

Rava: We learn both of these from Mishnayos:

(Mishnah): If Reuven held Shimon in a fire or in water so that Shimon could not escape, Reuven is liable;

If he pushed him in, and Shimon could have escaped, Reuven is exempt.

(Mishnah): If Reuven told Shimon 'tear my garment' or 'break my jug', and Shimon did so, he is liable;

If he said 'on condition that you will be exempt', he is exempt.

Question #1 (Rabah): If Reuven put a coal on the heart of Shimon's slave; and the slave died, is this like putting the coal on Shimon, or like on Shimon's money?

Question #2 (Rabah): If it is not like putting the coal on Shimon, if he puts it on Shimon's ox, what is the law?

Answer (Rabah): The slave is like Shimon (for he knows to remove it). The ox is like his money (it lacks understanding).

(Mishnah): If Reuven left his Kad (jug) in a Reshus ha'Rabim, and Shimon came and tripped on it, and it broke, Shimon is exempt from paying for it.

If Shimon was hurt by it, (Reuven,) the owner of the Chavis (barrel) must pay the damage.

(Gemara) Question #1: Why does it first call it a jug, and then call it a barrel?

Question #2 (Mishnah #2): If Levi was walking with a barrel, and Yehudah with a beam, and the jug broke when it hit the beam, Yehudah is exempt.

There it calls it a barrel, and then a jug!

Question #3 (Mishnah #3): If Levi was carrying a barrel of wine and Yehudah was carrying a jug of honey, and Yehudah's barrel cracked and Levi spilled out his wine and saved the honey, he is paid only like a worker (he is not compensated for the wine he sacrificed).

First it calls it a jug; and later it calls it a barrel!

Answer (Rav Papa - to all three questions): The two words are interchangeable.

Question: Why does the Tana bother to teach this?

Answer: It pertains to commerce.

Question: What is the case?

If in this place a jug is not called a barrel, nor vice-versa, one must give what the buyer requested!

Answer: The case is, most people call a jug 'Kad' and a barrel 'Chavis'. A minority of people call a barrel 'Kad' and a jug 'Chavis'.

One might have thought that we follow the majority (i.e. a buyer who asked for a Chavis may demand a barrel);

The Mishnah teaches that this is not so. In monetary matters, we do not follow the majority.

(Mishnah): If Shimon came and tripped on it, and it broke, he is exempt from paying for it.

Question: Why is Shimon exempt? He should look where he walks!

Answer #1 (Rav): The case is, Reuven filled the Reshus ha'Rabim with jugs.

Answer #2 (Shmuel): The case is, it was dark.

Answer #3 (R. Yochanan): The jug was around a corner, out of his sight.

Question (Rav Papa): The wording of the Mishnah is unlike Rav's explanation!

According to Rav, why does the Mishnah say 'he tripped'? He should be exempt even if he broke it b'Mezid!

Answer (Rav Zvid): Indeed, even if he breaks it, he is exempt. The Mishnah discusses tripping, so the Seifa can teach that if Shimon (tripped and) was hurt, Reuven must pay.

If Shimon (intentionally) broke it and got hurt, Reuven would be exempt.

Question: What is the reason?

Answer: He brought the damage on himself.

Since the Seifa discusses tripping, also the Reisha discusses tripping.

Answer #4 (R. Aba): Shimon is exempt, because normally people do not look where they walk.

A case occurred in Neharda'a, and Shmuel obligated one who tripped to pay. A case occurred in Pumbedisa, and Rava obligated one who tripped to pay.

Shmuel is consistent with his explanation of the Mishnah.

Inference: We can deduce that Rava holds like Shmuel.

Rejection (Rav Papa): Perhaps he holds like R. Aba. He ruled in a case of Kelim left near the corner of the olive-press;

Since the owner was allowed to leave his Kelim there (such is the custom), one who walks must watch his step. Since he did not, he must pay.

(Rav Chisda): The custom is, one who kicks someone with his knee must pay three Sela'im (for embarrassment alone). For kicking with the foot, he pays five Sela'im; for hitting him with a donkey's saddle, he pays 13.

Question (Rav Chisda): How much must one pay for hitting with the handle or blade of a shovel?

Objection (Rav Nachman): We do not obligate people to pay fines in Bavel! What case (do you ask about)?

Answer (Rav Chisda): There were two partners in a pit of water. Each day, one of them would water his field from it. One day, one was using it on his partner's day.

The partner protested, to no avail. He hit the one using it with the handle of a shovel.

Answer (Rav Nachman): He can hit him 100 times, and he is exempt!

Even the opinion that forbids taking the law into one's own hands, admits that one may do so to avoid a loss.

(Rav Yehudah): One may not take the law into his own hands;

(Rav Nachman): One may do so.

All permit when needed to avoid a loss. They argue about when there is no loss;

Rav Yehudah forbids, for he can go to Beis Din!

Rav Nachman permits. Since he acts properly, he need not exert himself to go to Beis Din.

Question (Rav Kahana - Beraisa - Ben Bag Bag): Do not enter your friend's property to take what is yours without permission. Perhaps you will appear like a thief to him! Rather, blunt his teeth and say 'I am taking what is mine!'