Talmud Yerushalmi
Yerushalmi Bava Kamma 2:7 ירושלמי בבא קמא ב׳:ז׳
Part of: Chapter 2
Reading: Hebrew · Simple EnglishHebrew · Faithful translationHebrew onlyHebrew · Simple EnglishHebrew · Faithful translationHebrew onlySimple English onlyFaithful translation onlySide by side
משנה: שׁוֹר הַמַּזִּיק בִּרְשׁוּת הַנִּיזָּק כֵּיצַד נָגַח נָגַף נָשַׁךְ רָבַץ בָּעַט בִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים מְשַׁלֵּם חֲצִי נֶזֶק. בִּרְשׁוּת הַנִּיזָּק רִבִּי טַרְפוֹן אוֹמֵר נֶזֶק שָׁלֵם וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים חֲצִי נֶזֶק. אָמַר לָהֶן רִבִּי טַרְפוֹן. מַה בִּמְקוֹם שֶׁהֵיקֵל עַל הַשֵּׁן וְעַל הָרֶגֶל בִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים שֶׁהוּא פָטוּר הֶחֱמִיר עֲלֵיהֶן בִּרְשׁוּת הַנִּיזָּק לְשַׁלֵּם נֶזֶק שָׁלֵם. מְקוֹם שֶׁהֶחֱמִיר עַל הַקֶּרֶן בִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים לְשַׁלֵּם חֲצִי נֶזֶק אֵינוֹ דִין שֶׁנַּחְמִיר עָלֶיהֶן בִּרְשׁוּת הַנִּיזָּק לְשַׁלֵּם נֶזֶק שָׁלֵם. אָמְרוּ לוֹ דַּייוֹ לַבָּא מִן הַדִּין לִהְיוֹת כַּנִּדּוֹן. מַה בִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים חֲצִי נֶזֶק אַף בִּרְשׁוּת הַנִּיזָּק חֲצִי נֶזֶק. אָמַר לָהֶן. אֲנִי לֹא אָדִין קֶרֶן מִקֶּרֶן אֲנִי אָדִין קֶרֶן מֵרֶגֶל. וּמַה אִם בִּמְקוֹם שֶׁהֵיקֵל עַל הַשֵּׁן וְעַל הָרֶגֶל בִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים הֶחֱמִיר בַּקֶּרֶן. מְקוֹם שֶׁהֶחֱמִיר עֲלֵיהֶן בִּרְשׁוּת הַנִּיזָּק אֵינוֹ דִין שֶׁנַּחְמִיר בַּקֶּרֶן. אָמְרוּ לוֹ דַּייוֹ לַבָּא מִן הַדִּין לִהְיוֹת כַּנִּדּוֹן. מַה בִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים מֲצִי נֶזֶק אַף בִּרְשׁוּת הַנִּיזָּק חֲצִי נֶזֶק.
MISHNAH: How does one treat the bull of the person causing the damage in the domain of the person sustaining the damage? If it gored, hit, bit, wallowed, or kicked, in the public domain he pays half of the damages. In the domain of the person sustaining the damage, Rebbi Ṭarphon said, full damages; but the Sages say, half damages99Cf. Halakhak 1:4, Note 160..
Rebbi Tarphon said to them: Since in a case where He was lenient with [damage by] tooth or foot in the public domain, where one is free, He was restrictive for them in the domain of the person sustaining the damage, when full damages must be paid, and He was restrictive regarding damage by the horn in the public domain, where one has to pay half damages; is it not logical that we should be restrictive in this case in the domain of the person sustaining the damage, that full damages must be paid? They said to him, it is sufficient for the result of an argument de minore ad majus that it should be like the premiss100This is an intrinsic limitation of arguments de minore ad majus, derived from Num. 12:14 (Sifry Num. 106; Babli 25a), discussed by the author (loc. cit. Note 92, p. 183).. Since in the public domain [one pays] half damages, also in the domain of the person sustaining the damage half damages.
He said to them, I do not argue horn from horn, I argue horn from foot! Since in a case where He was lenient with [damage by] tooth or foot in the public domain, He was restrictive for damage by the horn, when He was restrictive with [damage by] tooth or foot in the domain of the person sustaining the damage; is it not logical that we should be restrictive [in case of damage] by the horn? They said to him, it is sufficient for the result of an argument de minore ad majus that it should be like the premiss. Since in the public domain [one pays] half damages, also in the domain of the person sustaining the damage half damages.
MISHNAH: How does one treat the bull of the person causing the damage in the domain of the person sustaining the damage? If it gored, hit, bit, wallowed, or kicked, in the public domain he pays half of the damages. In the domain of the person sustaining the damage, Rebbi Ṭarphon said, full damages; but the Sages say, half damages99Cf. Halakhak 1:4, Note 160..
Rebbi Tarphon said to them: Since in a case where He was lenient with [damage by] tooth or foot in the public domain, where one is free, He was restrictive for them in the domain of the person sustaining the damage, when full damages must be paid, and He was restrictive regarding damage by the horn in the public domain, where one has to pay half damages; is it not logical that we should be restrictive in this case in the domain of the person sustaining the damage, that full damages must be paid? They said to him, it is sufficient for the result of an argument de minore ad majus that it should be like the premiss100This is an intrinsic limitation of arguments de minore ad majus, derived from Num. 12:14 (Sifry Num. 106; Babli 25a), discussed by the author (loc. cit. Note 92, p. 183).. Since in the public domain [one pays] half damages, also in the domain of the person sustaining the damage half damages.
He said to them, I do not argue horn from horn, I argue horn from foot! Since in a case where He was lenient with [damage by] tooth or foot in the public domain, He was restrictive for damage by the horn, when He was restrictive with [damage by] tooth or foot in the domain of the person sustaining the damage; is it not logical that we should be restrictive [in case of damage] by the horn? They said to him, it is sufficient for the result of an argument de minore ad majus that it should be like the premiss. Since in the public domain [one pays] half damages, also in the domain of the person sustaining the damage half damages.
הלכה: שׁוֹר הַמַּזִּיק בִּרְשׁוּת הַנִּיזָּק כול׳ עַד סוף. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. דְּרִבִּי טַרְפוֹן הוּא. בִּרְשׁוּת הַנִּיזָּק. רִבִּי טַרְפוֹן אוֹמֵר. נֶזֶק שָׁלֵם. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים. חֲצִי נֶזֶק.
HALAKHAH: “The bull of the person causing the damage in the domain of the person sustaining the damage,” etc. to the end. 101This is Halakhah 1:4. Rebbi Joḥanan said, this follows Rebbi Ṭarphon: “In the domain of the person sustaining the damage, Rebbi Ṭarphon said, full damages; but the Sages say, half damages.”
HALAKHAH: “The bull of the person causing the damage in the domain of the person sustaining the damage,” etc. to the end. 101This is Halakhah 1:4. Rebbi Joḥanan said, this follows Rebbi Ṭarphon: “In the domain of the person sustaining the damage, Rebbi Ṭarphon said, full damages; but the Sages say, half damages.”