MISHNAH:

<<A spark

<<that came out

<<from under

<<the hammer

<<and caused damage —

<<he is liable.

A camel

<<that was

<<loaded with

<<flax,

<<and passed

<<in the public domain,

<<and entered

<<its flax

<<into

<<the shop,

<<and caught fire

<<from the lamp

<<of

<<the shopkeeper,

<<and set fire to

<<the building —

<<the owner of

<<the camel

<<is liable.

<<If left

<<the shopkeeper

<<his lamp

<<outside,

<<the shopkeeper

<<is liable.

<<Rabbi Yehuda

<<says:

<<with a lamp of

<<Chanukah

<<he is exempt.

GEMARA:

<<Ravina said in the name of Rava:

<<learn from it

<<from Rabbi

<<Yehuda:

<<a lamp of

<<Chanukah —

<<it is a mitzvah

<<to place it

<<within

<<ten.

<<For if

<<it enters your mind

<<above

<<ten,

<<why

<<does say

<<Rabbi Yehuda:

<<a lamp of

<<Chanukah —

<<he is exempt?

<<Let him say

<<to him:

<<it was

<<for you

<<to place it

<<above

<<the camel

<<and its rider!

<<Rather,

<<is it not

<<learn from it:

<<it is a mitzvah

<<to place it

<<within

<<ten?

They say:

<<no;

<<actually

<<I will say

<<to you:

<<even

<<above

<<ten;

<<what

<<you said:

<<you should have

<<placed it

<<above

<<the camel

<<and its rider?

<<Since

<<with a mitzvah

<<he is occupied,

<<all

<<this

<<did not

<<trouble him

<<the Rabbis.

Rav Kahana said,

<<expounded

<<Rav Nasan bar Minyomi

<<in the name

<<of Rabbi Tanchum:

<<a lamp of

<<Chanukah

<<that one placed

<<above

<<twenty

<<cubits

<<is invalid,

<<like a sukkah

<<and like an alleyway.

We shall return to you,

<<‘One who brings in’.

MISHNAH:

<<Greater is

<<the measure of

<<the payment of

<<double

<<than the measure of

<<the payment of

<<four

<<or five.

<<For the measure of

<<the payment of

<<double

<<applies

<<both

<<to a thing

<<that has

<<in it

<<the breath of

<<life

<<and

<<to a thing

<<that does not have

<<in it

<<the breath of

<<life,

<<while the measure of

<<the payment of

<<four

<<or five

<<does not

<<apply

<<except

<<to an ox

<<and a sheep

<<alone,

<<as it is said:

<<“If

<<steals

<<a man

<<an ox

<<or

<<a sheep

<<and slaughters it

<<or

<<sells it

<<etc.”

Does not

<<one who steals

<<after

<<the thief

<<pay

<<the payment of

<<double;

<<nor

<<does one who slaughters

<<nor

<<one who sells

<<after

<<the thief

<<pay

<<the payment of

<<four

<<or five.

GEMARA:

<<But

<<“the measure of

<<the payment of

<<double

<<applies

<<both

<<to a thief

<<and

<<to one who claims

<<the claim of

<<a thief,

<<while the measure of

<<the payment of

<<four

<<or five

<<does not

<<apply

<<except

<<to a thief

<<alone”

<<it does not

<<teach.

It supports

<<him,

<<Rabbi Chiya bar Abba,

<<for Rabbi Chiya bar Abba said in the name of Rabbi Yochanan:

<<one who claims

<<the claim of

<<a thief

<<with a deposit

<<pays

<<the double payment;

<<if he slaughtered

<<or sold

<<he pays

<<the fourfold or fivefold payment.

There are those

<<who say:

<<shall we say

<<it supports

<<him,

<<Rabbi Chiya bar Abba,

<<for Rabbi Chiya bar Abba said in the name of Rabbi Yochanan:

<<one who claims

<<the claim of

<<a thief

<<with a deposit

<<pays

<<the double payment;

<<if he slaughtered

<<or sold

<<he pays

<<the fourfold or fivefold payment?

Does

<<it teach:

<<“there is no

<<difference”?!

<<“Greater”

<<it teaches;

<<it taught

<<and left out.

For the measure of

<<the payment of

<<double

<<applies

<<etc.

<<From where

<<are these

<<matters?

<<For the Rabbis taught:

<<“For

<<every

<<matter of

<<trespass” —

<<a generalization;

<<“for

<<an ox,

<<for

<<a donkey,

<<for

<<a sheep,

<<and for

<<a garment” —

<<a specification;

<<“for

<<every

<<lost thing” —

<<it went back

<<and generalized;

a generalization

<<and a specification

<<and a generalization —

<<you may not

<<judge

<<except

<<according to the likeness of

<<the specification:

<<just as

<<the specification

<<is explicit as

<<a thing

<<that is movable

<<and whose body

<<is money,

<<so too

<<every

<<thing

<<that is movable

<<and whose body

<<is money.

Excluded are

<<lands,

<<which are not

<<movable;

<<excluded are

<<slaves,

<<who are compared

<<to lands;

<<excluded are

<<documents,

<<for even though

<<they are movable,

<<is not

<<their body

<<money;

<<excluded is

<<consecrated property:

<<“his fellow”

<<is written.

Or:

<<just as

<<the specification

<<is explicit as

<<a thing

<<whose carcass

<<imparts impurity

<<by contact

<<and by carrying,

<<so too

<<every

<<thing

<<whose carcass

<<imparts impurity

<<by contact

<<and by carrying;

<<but

<<birds

<<not!

And can

<<you

<<say

<<so?

<<But

<<“a garment”

<<is written!

<<They say:

<<we

<<of living creatures

<<are speaking;

<<say

<<of living creatures:

<<a thing

<<whose carcass

<<imparts impurity

<<by contact

<<and by carrying —

<<yes;

<<a thing

<<whose

<<carcass does not

<<impart impurity

<<by contact

<<and by carrying —

<<no,