שור המזיק ברשות הניזק כיצד. נגח. נגף. נשך. רבץ. בעט. ברשות הרבים משלם חצי נזק. ברשות הניזק. רבי טרפון אומר נזק שלם. וחכמים אומרים חצי נזק. אמר להם רבי טרפון ומה במקום שהקל על השן ועל הרגל ברשות הרבים שהוא פטור. החמיר עליהם ברשות הניזק לשלם נזק שלם. מקום שהחמיר על הקרן ברשות הרבים לשלם חצי נזק. אינו דין שנחמיר עליה ברשות הניזק לשלם נזק שלם. אמרו לו דיו לבא מן הדין להיות כנדון מה ברשות הרבים חצי נזק אף ברשות הניזק חצי נזק. אמר להם אני לא אדון קרן מקרן אני אדון קרן מרגל ומה במקום שהקל על השן ועל הרגל ברשות הרבים החמיר בקרן. מקום שהחמיר על השן ועל הרגל ברשות הניזק אינו דין שנחמיר בקרן. אמרו לו דיו לבא מן הדין להיות כנדון מה ברשות הרבים חצי נזק אף ברשות הניזק חצי נזק:
“An ox which causes damage in the private domain of him that is injured” how is this so? If it gored, pushed, bit, lay down, or kicked in the public domain its owner pays only half damages. But if in the private domain of him that is injured, Rabbi Tarfon says, “He pays full damages.” The Sages says, “Half damages.” Rabbi Tarfon said to them: “Now, in a case in which the law dealt leniently with regards to damages caused by the foot and tooth in the public domain, in which case he is exempt, and stringently in the private domain of him that is injured to pay full damages, then since they have dealt stringently with damage caused by the horn in the public domain, ought we not deal more stringently with damage cause by the horn in the private domain of him that was injured, so that full damages be imposed.” They (the sages) said to him: “It is enough if the inferred law is as strict as that from which it is inferred: if [for damages caused by the horn] in the public domain half damages [are imposed], so also [for like damages] in the private domain of him that was injured, half damages [are imposed]. He said to them: “I shall not derive the law in one case of damage caused by the horn from the law in another case of damage caused by the horn. Rather I will derive the law of damage caused by the horn from the law of damage caused by the foot. Now in a case in which the law dealt leniently with regards to damages caused by the foot or tooth in the public domain, they have dealt strictly with damage caused by the horn, ought we not deal more stringently with damage cause by the horn in the private domain. They (the sages) said to him: “It is enough if the inferred law is as strict as that from which it is inferred: if [for damages caused by the horn] in the public domain half damages [are imposed], so also [for like damages] in the private domain of him that was injured, half damages [are imposed].
Comments
Select a line on the left to view commentary.
Help support Theologa. Click to donate now!