Mishnah.org Logo

המשנה היומית של היום

בבא קמא ג׳:י״א - ד׳:א׳

The Mishnah Yomi for Sunday, August 18, 2024 is בבא קמא ג׳:י״א - ד׳:א׳

＜ היום הקודםהיוםלמחרת ＞

משנה א

Mishnayos Bava Kamma Perek 3 Mishnah 11

בבא קמא פרק ג׳ משנה י"א

11
With regard to an ox that was pursuing another ox, and the ox being pursued became injured, but there are no witnesses as to how it was injured, and this one, the owner of the injured ox, says to the owner of the pursuing ox: Your ox injured my ox, and you are liable to pay me damages, and that one, the owner of the pursuing ox, says in response: No; rather, it was hurt by a rock, and I am not liable, then in this case, the burden of proof rests upon the claimant. As long as the owner of the injured ox cannot prove that the injury was inflicted by the pursuing ox, the owner of the pursuing ox is not liable. In a case where two oxen, belonging to two different owners, were pursuing one ox belonging to a third person, and that ox was injured by one of the pursuing oxen, and this one, the owner of one of the pursuing oxen, says to the owner of the other: It was your ox that caused the injury, and that one, the owner of the other pursuing ox, says: No, it was your ox that caused the injury, the two of them are exempt, since each of them rejects the claim of the injured party that his ox caused the injury. If both oxen belonged to one person, both are liable, as will be explained in the Gemara. If the pursuing oxen both belonged to one person, and were both innocuous, so that restitution is paid exclusively from proceeds of the sale of the belligerent ox, and one was large and the other one small, in this case, if the injured party says that the large ox caused the damage, and he is therefore entitled to receive restitution for half the damage from the value of the large ox, but the one liable for damage says: No; rather, the small ox caused the damage, and half of its value is not sufficient to cover half the damage; or, similarly, in a case where one ox is innocuous and one is forewarned, and the injured party says: The forewarned ox caused the damage, and the injured party is therefore eligible to receive full damages, but the one liable for damage says: No; rather, the innocuous ox caused the damage, in which case he is liable to pay only half the damage; in both of the above cases, the principle is that the burden of proof rests upon the claimant. If the injured animals were two oxen, one large and the other one small, and the ones that caused the damage were also two oxen, one large and one small, and the injured party says: The large one injured the large one and the small one injured the small one, and the one liable for damage says: No; rather, the small one injured the large one, in which case, if half the value of the belligerent ox does not cover half the damage, he is not required to pay more, and the large one injured the small one; or, similarly, if one of the belligerent oxen was innocuous and one forewarned, and the injured party says: The forewarned ox injured the large one, and the innocuous ox injured the small one, and the one liable for damage says: No; rather, the innocuous ox injured the large one and the forewarned ox injured the small one; here too, the burden of proof rests upon the claimant.
שׁוֹר שֶׁהָיָה רוֹדֵף אַחַר שׁוֹר אַחֵר, וְהֻזַּק, זֶה אוֹמֵר שׁוֹרְךָ הִזִּיק, וְזֶה אוֹמֵר לֹא כִי, אֶלָּא בְסֶלַע לָקָה, הַמּוֹצִיא מֵחֲבֵרוֹ עָלָיו הָרְאָיָה. הָיוּ שְׁנַיִם רוֹדְפִים אַחַר אֶחָד, זֶה אוֹמֵר שׁוֹרְךָ הִזִּיק, וְזֶה אוֹמֵר שׁוֹרְךָ הִזִּיק, שְׁנֵיהֶם פְּטוּרִין. אִם הָיוּ שְׁנֵיהֶן שֶׁל אִישׁ אֶחָד, שְׁנֵיהֶן חַיָּבִין. הָיָה אֶחָד גָּדוֹל וְאֶחָד קָטָן, הַנִּזָּק אוֹמֵר גָּדוֹל הִזִּיק, וְהַמַּזִּיק אוֹמֵר לֹא כִי, אֶלָּא קָטָן הִזִּיק. אֶחָד תָּם וְאֶחָד מוּעָד, הַנִּזָּק אוֹמֵר, מוּעָד הִזִּיק, וְהַמַּזִּיק אוֹמֵר לֹא כִי, אֶלָּא תָם הִזִּיק, הַמּוֹצִיא מֵחֲבֵרוֹ עָלָיו הָרְאָיָה. הָיוּ הַנִּזּוֹקִין שְׁנַיִם, אֶחָד גָּדוֹל וְאֶחָד קָטָן, וְהַמַּזִּיקִים שְׁנַיִם, אֶחָד גָּדוֹל וְאֶחָד קָטָן, הַנִּזָּק אוֹמֵר, גָּדוֹל הִזִּיק אֶת הַגָּדוֹל וְקָטָן אֶת הַקָּטָן, וּמַזִּיק אוֹמֵר לֹא כִי, אֶלָּא קָטָן אֶת הַגָּדוֹל וְגָדוֹל אֶת הַקָּטָן. אֶחָד תָּם וְאֶחָד מוּעָד, הַנִּזָּק אוֹמֵר, מוּעָד הִזִּיק אֶת הַגָּדוֹל וְתָם אֶת הַקָּטָן, וְהַמַּזִּיק אוֹמֵר לֹא כִי, אֶלָּא תָם אֶת הַגָּדוֹל וּמוּעָד אֶת הַקָּטָן, הַמּוֹצִיא מֵחֲבֵרוֹ עָלָיו הָרְאָיָה:
י"א
ברטנורא

בסלע לקה – it rubbed itself against a rock and was damaged.

היו שנים רודפין אחר א' – two oxen [belonging to] two people are pursuing/running after the ox of another person.

שניהם פטורים – since both pushed it aside.

שניהם חייבים – In the Gemara (Tractate Bava Kamma 36a) it explains our Mishnah as for example that both of them (i.e., the oxen) are innocuous for the [owner of the] innocuous ox does not pay other than from his own funds. But when both are present, the first one pays the [owner of the] damaged ox one-half damages between the two of them. But where both are not present, one can say to him: Go bring proof that this ox caused you damage and I will pay you.

גדול הזיק – that there is in his body the equivalent of half-damages.

קטן הזיק – and you will take the worth of the small ox, and the excess one-half of your damages, you will lose.

קאן הזיק את הגדול – and even though that half of the damages of he larger ox is greater, you will not take other than my small one. And half of his damages of the small one is yours. Take from the large one, and all of this is “he who seeks reparation from his fellow must produce evidence,” as we have taught in our Mishnah. But if he did not bring proof, he has nothing and even the value of he innocuous [ox, and even if the [owner of the] small ox who admitted to him, he lacks, for the person who makes a claim on his fellow for wheat and admits to him regarding barley is exempt even from the monetary value of the barley. But if the [owner of the ox] who suffered damage grabbed a measure of what the [owner of the] ox who caused the damages admitted to him, we don’t take it from him.

בסלע לקה. מתחכך היה בסלע ולקה:

היו שנים רודפין אחר אחד. שני שוורים של שני בני אדם רודפים אחר שור של אדם אחד:

שניהם פטורים. דתרוייהו מדחו ליה:

שניהם חייבים. בגמרא מפרש למתניתין כגון ששניהם תמין, שאין התם משלם אלא מגופו. וכי איתנהו לתרוייהו קמן משתלם הניזק חצי נזקו מבין שניהם, אבל ליתנהו לתרוייהו מצי אמר ליה זיל אייתי ראיה דהאי תורא אזקך ואשלם לך:

גדול הזיק. ויש בגופו שוה חצי נזק:

קטן הזיק. ודמי הקטן תקח, ומותר חצי נזקך תפסיד:

קטן הזיק את הגדול. ואע״פ שחצי נזקו של גדול מרובה, לא תקח אלא קטן שלי. וחצי נזקו של קטן שלך, קח מן הגדול. וכל הנך המוציא מחבירו עליו הראיה דתנינן במתניתין, אם לא הביא ראיה אין לו כלום ואפילו דמי תם, ואפילו קטן שהודה לו אין לו, שהטוען את חברו חטין והודה לו בשעורים פטור אף מדמי שעורים. ואי תפס הניזק שיעור מה שהודה לו המזיק, לא מפקינן מיניה:

משנה ב

Mishnayos Bava Kamma Perek 4 Mishnah 1

בבא קמא פרק ד׳ משנה א׳

1
With regard to an innocuous ox that gored four or five other oxen one after the other, its owner shall pay the owner of the last one of them half of the damages from the proceeds of the sale of the belligerent ox; and if there is surplus value left in his ox after he pays that owner, he shall return it to the owner of the previous ox that was gored; and if there is still surplus value left in his ox after he pays that owner, he shall return it to the one prior to the previous one. The principle is that the owner of the latest of the oxen gored in succession gains. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Shimon says that the division of the compensation is as follows: With regard to an innocuous ox worth two hundred dinars that gored an ox worth two hundred dinars, thereby killing it, and the carcass is worthless, the injured party takes one hundred dinars, i.e., half the cost of the damage, from the proceeds of the sale of the belligerent ox, and the owner of the belligerent ox takes the remaining one hundred dinars. If the ox, after goring the first ox but before compensation had been paid, again gored another ox worth two hundred dinars, and the carcass is worthless, the owner of the last ox that was gored takes one hundred dinars, and with regard to payment for the previous goring, the owner of this ox that was gored takes fifty dinars, which is half the remaining value of the belligerent ox after one hundred dinars were paid to the last injured party, and the owner of that belligerent ox takes the remaining fifty dinars. If the ox, after goring the first two oxen but before compensation had been paid, again gored another ox worth two hundred dinars, and the carcass is worthless, the last injured party takes one hundred dinars, the previous one takes fifty dinars, and the first two, i.e., the first injured party and the owner of the belligerent ox, divide the remainder, each receiving one gold dinar, which is worth twenty-five silver dinars.
שׁוֹר שֶׁנָּגַח אַרְבָּעָה וַחֲמִשָּׁה שְׁוָרִים זֶה אַחַר זֶה, יְשַׁלֵּם לָאַחֲרוֹן שֶׁבָּהֶם. וְאִם יֶשׁ בּוֹ מוֹתָר, יַחֲזִיר לְשֶׁלְּפָנָיו. וְאִם יֶשׁ בּוֹ מוֹתָר, יַחֲזִיר לְשֶׁלִּפְנֵי פָנָיו. וְהָאַחֲרוֹן אַחֲרוֹן נִשְׂכָּר, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, שׁוֹר שָׁוֶה מָאתַיִם שֶׁנָּגַח שׁוֹר שָׁוֶה מָאתַיִם, וְאֵין הַנְּבֵלָה יָפָה כְלוּם, זֶה נוֹטֵל מָנֶה וְזֶה נוֹטֵל מָנֶה. חָזַר וְנָגַח שׁוֹר אַחֵר שָׁוֶה מָאתַיִם, הָאַחֲרוֹן נוֹטֵל מָנֶה, וְשֶׁלְּפָנָיו, זֶה נוֹטֵל חֲמִשִּׁים זוּז וְזֶה נוֹטֵל חֲמִשִּׁים זוּז. חָזַר וְנָגַח שׁוֹר אַחֵר שָׁוֶה מָאתַיִם, הָאַחֲרוֹן נוֹטֵל מָנֶה, וְשֶׁלְּפָנָיו, חֲמִשִּׁים זוּז, וּשְׁנַיִם הָרִאשׁוֹנִים, דִּינַר זָהָב:
א׳
ברטנורא

שור שנגח ד' וה' - and in all of them it (i.e., the ox) was innocuous and that it pays from his own funds.

ישלם – he (i.e., the owner) pays one-half of the damages caused, and to the last one [who suffered damage is paid] first. In the Gemara (Tractate Bava Kamma 36b), it establishes that our Mishnah deals with a the one who suffered damage grabbed hold of the ox causing damage to collect from him and became for him a paid bailee. But when it left under his hand and caused damage, the first one (i.e., the owner of the ox that was damaged) is liable for his damages. Therefore, the last [owner of an ox which suffered damage] is compensated one-half of his damages from the full amount.

ואם יש בו מותר יחזיר לשלפניו – this is what he said: if there is surplus of his damages [caused] he should restore to the [owner of the ox who suffered damage] that was prior to him as, for example, that the half-damages of the first was a Maneh (100 zuz) and the half damages of the last was fifty and the ox was worth two-hundred. From the outset, when the ox gored the ox of the he first [owner] which was damaged, that half of his damages was a Maneh, the [owner of] the ox who was damaged received a Maneh, and the owners [received] a Maneh , when they captured the injured ox and it gored while under their control, the owners do not lose a Maneh that they had for it (i.e., the ox), for he was not guarding them, [properly] other than on the damaged ox which he had captured, and when it damaged a second [ox], and half of those damages was fifty, the [owner of the] first damaged ox lost from his Maneh – fifty , and he gives it to the [owner of the] second damaged [ox] and the surplus up until a Maneh he returns to him, and the owners take their own Maneh.

RABBI SHIMON SAYS: Rabbi Shimon is of the opinion that the original owners and the victim become partners in ownership of the ox that attacked, and they are both liable in subsequent damages. How so? AN OX WORTH 200 WHO GORED...

ושלפניו – that [ox] which was damaged first, he (i.e., the owner) takes fifty zuz and the owners [of the ox] who damaged take fifty zuz, for the [owner of the] one damaged first has the half [damages], therefore, he pays one-half the compensation of his damage.

חזר ונגח שור שוה מאתים – the [owner of the] last one takes a half Maneh from every one – for he is paid out of his own pocket and it is found that the one before him that was his one-half, he pays from his portion one-half a Maneh and takes the last one.

But the two first [owners] – the first owner [whose ox] was damaged and the owners, for each one of them had a quarter, each one of them pays one-quarter of his damages.

דינר זהב – which is twenty-five silver dinars.

שור שנגח ד׳ וה׳ ובכולם היה תם דמשתלם מגופו:

ישלם. חצי נזק לאחרון תחלה. בגמרא מוקי למתניתין כגון שתפסו ניזק לשור המזיק לגבות ממנו ונעשה עליו שומר שכר. וכשיצא מתחת ידו והזיק, הניזק הראשון חייב בנזקיו, לפיכך האחרון משתלם חצי נזקו משלם:

ואם יש בו מותר יחזיר לשלפניו. הכי קאמר, אם יש בו מותר בנזקיו, יחזיר לשלפניו. כגון שחצי נזקו של הראשון היה מנה, וחצי נזק האחרון היה חמשים, והשור שוה מאתים. מתחלה כשנגח שור זה שורו של הניזק הראשון שחצי נזקו מנה, היה לניזק בשור זה מנה, ולבעלים מנה. וכשתפסו הניזק ונגח תחת ידו, אין לבעלים להפסיד מנה שהיה להם בו, שהרי לא היתה שמירתו עליהן אלא על הניזק שתפסו. וכשהזיק לשני והיה חצי נזקו חמשים, איבד הניזק הראשון מן המנה שלו חמשים ונותן לזה הניזק השני, והמותר עד המנה חוזר לו. והבעלים נוטלים המנה שלהם:

רבי שמעון אומר וכו׳ רבי שמעון סבר שותפי נינהו הבעלים והניזק בשור המזיק, ושניהם מתחייבים בנזקיו. כיצד, שור שוה מאתים שנגח וכו׳:

ושלפניו. זהו ניזק ראשון. נוטל חמישים זוז, והבעלים חמשים זוז. דיש לניזק ראשון בו החצי, הלכך משלם חצי תשלומי נזקו:

חזר ונגח שור שוה מאתים. האחרון נוטל מנה החצי מכל מה שהוא, דמגופו משתלם. ונמצא אותו שלפניו שהיה החצי שלו, משלם מחלקו חצי מנה שנוטל האחרון:

ושנים הראשונים. ניזק ראשון והבעלים שהיה להם לכל אחד רביע, משלמין כל אחד רביעית של נזקו:

דינר זהב. שהם עשרים וחמשה דינרים של כסף:

שאלות נפוצות על משנה יומית

עדיין יש לכם שאלה? צרו קשר