Talmud Yerushalmi
Yerushalmi Bava Kamma 3:11 ירושלמי בבא קמא ג׳:י״א
Part of: Chapter 3
Reading: Hebrew · Simple EnglishHebrew · Faithful translationHebrew onlyHebrew · Simple EnglishHebrew · Faithful translationHebrew onlySimple English onlyFaithful translation onlySide by side
משנה: שׁוֹר שֶׁהָיָה רוֹדֶף אַחַר שׁוֹר אַחֵר וְהוּזַּק. זֶה אוֹמֵר שׁוֹרְךָ הִזִּיק וְזֶה אוֹמֵר לֹא כִי אֶלָּא בַסֶּלַע לָקָה הַמּוֹצִיא מֵחֲבֵירוֹ עָלָיו הָרְאָיָיה. הָיוּ שְׁנַיִם רוֹדְפִים אַחַר אֶחָד זֶה אוֹמֵר שׁוֹרְךָ הִזִּיק וְזֶה אוֹמֵר שׁוֹרְךָ הִזִּיק שְׁנֵיהֶן פְּטוּרִין. וְאִם הָיוּ שְׁנֵיהֶן שֶׁל אִישׁ אֶחָד שְׁנֵיהֶן חַיָיבִין. הָיָה אֶחָד גָּדוֹל וְאֶחָד קָטוֹן הַנִּיזָּק אוֹמֵר הַגָּדוֹל הִזִּיק וְהַמַּזִּיק אוֹמֵר לֹא כִי אֶלָּא הַקָּטָן הִזִּיק. אֶחָד תָּם וְאֶחָד מוּעָד הַנִּיזָּק אוֹמֵר מוּעָד הִזִּיק וְהַמַּזִּיק אוֹמֵר לֹא כִי אֶלָּא תָם הִזִּיק. הַמּוֹצִיא מֵחֲבֵירוֹ עָלָיו הָרְאָיָיה. הָיוּ הַנִּיזָּקִין שְׁנַיִם אֶחָד גָּדוֹל וְאֶחָד קָטוֹן וְהַמַּזִּיקִים שְׁנַיִם אֶחָד גָּדוֹל וְאֶחָד קָטָן. הַנִּיזָּק אוֹמֵר הַגָּדוֹל הִזִּיק אֶת הַגָּדוֹל וְקָטָן אֶת הַקָּטָן וְהַמַּזִּיק אוֹמֵר לֹא כִי אֶלָּא קָטוֹן אֶת הַגָּדוֹל וְגָדוֹל אֶת הַקָּטָן. אֶחָד תָּם וְאֶחָד מוּעָד הַנִּיזָּק אוֹמֵר מוּעָד הִזִּיק אֶת הַגָּדוֹל וְתָם אֶת הַקָּטָן וְהַמַּזִּיק אוֹמֵר לֹא כִי אֶלָּא תָם אֶת הַגָּדוֹל וְמוּעָד אֶת הַקָּטָן. הַמּוֹצִיא מֵחֲבֵירוֹ עָלָיו הָרְאָיָה.
MISHNAH: If a bull was pursuing another bull which was damaged. This one says, your bull did the damage, but the other one says, it was hurt by a rock; the burden of proof is on the claimant136Without proof that stands up in court he cannot collect any damages..
If two [bulls] were pursuing another [bull]; each of them says: your bull did the damage; neither of them is liable. But if they belonged to one owner, he is liable for both of them.
If one was large, the other small. The person sustaining the damage says that the large one did the damage137Since for claims of damages caused by a ‘tame’ animal the amount which can be recovered is limited by the value of the attacking animal (Note 131, Mishnah 1:5), the person suffering the loss is interested in raising that limit. but the person causing the damage says that the small one did the damage, the burden of proof is on the claimant.
If two were damaged, one large and one small, and the [bulls] doing the damage were two, one large and one small. The person sustaining the damage says that the large one damaged the large one137Since for claims of damages caused by a ‘tame’ animal the amount which can be recovered is limited by the value of the attacking animal (Note 131, Mishnah 1:5), the person suffering the loss is interested in raising that limit. and the small one the small; but the person causing the damage says that the small one did damage the large one and the large one the small. [Or] one tame and one notorious, the person sustaining the damage says that the notorious one damaged the large one138In order to recover his entire loss without limitation. and the tame one the small; but the person causing the damage says that the tame one did damage the large one and the notorious one the small. The burden of proof is on the claimant.
MISHNAH: If a bull was pursuing another bull which was damaged. This one says, your bull did the damage, but the other one says, it was hurt by a rock; the burden of proof is on the claimant136Without proof that stands up in court he cannot collect any damages..
If two [bulls] were pursuing another [bull]; each of them says: your bull did the damage; neither of them is liable. But if they belonged to one owner, he is liable for both of them.
If one was large, the other small. The person sustaining the damage says that the large one did the damage137Since for claims of damages caused by a ‘tame’ animal the amount which can be recovered is limited by the value of the attacking animal (Note 131, Mishnah 1:5), the person suffering the loss is interested in raising that limit. but the person causing the damage says that the small one did the damage, the burden of proof is on the claimant.
If two were damaged, one large and one small, and the [bulls] doing the damage were two, one large and one small. The person sustaining the damage says that the large one damaged the large one137Since for claims of damages caused by a ‘tame’ animal the amount which can be recovered is limited by the value of the attacking animal (Note 131, Mishnah 1:5), the person suffering the loss is interested in raising that limit. and the small one the small; but the person causing the damage says that the small one did damage the large one and the large one the small. [Or] one tame and one notorious, the person sustaining the damage says that the notorious one damaged the large one138In order to recover his entire loss without limitation. and the tame one the small; but the person causing the damage says that the tame one did damage the large one and the notorious one the small. The burden of proof is on the claimant.
הלכה: יֵשׁ חַיָיב עַל מַעֲשֵׂה שׁוֹרוֹ כול׳. רִבִּי יוּדָן בָּעֵי. הָדֵין עֲמָדַת בֵּית דִּין מַהוּ. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מֵהָדָא. שְׁנַיִם שֶׁזָּרְקוּ שְׁתֵּי צְרוֹרוֹת וְשִׁיבְּרוּ שְׁתֵּי כַּדִּין אַחַת שֶׁלְּיַיִן וְאַחַת שֶׁלְּשֶׁמֶן. זֶה אוֹמֵר. שֶׁלְּיַיִן שָׁבַרְתִּי. וְזֶה אוֹמֵר. שֶׁלְּיַיִן שָׁבַרְתִּי. שְׁנֵיהֶן מְשַׁלְּמִין שֶׁלְּיַיִן. אַחַת רֵיקָנִית וְאַחַת מְלֵיאָה. זֶה אוֹמֵר. רֵיקָנִית שָׁבַרְתִּי. וְזֶה אוֹמֵר. רֵיקָנִית שָׁבַרְתִּי. שְׁנֵיהֶן מְשַׁלְּמִין אֶת הָרֵיקָנִית. שִׁבְּרוּ חָבִית אַחַת. זֶה אוֹמֵר. אַתֶּה שָׁבַרְתָּהּ. וְזֶה אוֹמֵר. אַתֶּה שָׁבַרְתָּהּ. שְׁנֵיהֶן פְּטוּרִין.
HALAKHAH: “A person may be liable for the action of his bull,” etc. Rebbi Yudan asked: How is the court trial145This really is a continuation of examples to Mishnaiot 13–16 applying the principle that “the burden of proof is on the claimant”, even if the resulting judgment be logically inconsistent.? Let us hear from the following: “Two persons threw two pebbles and broke two jugs, one full of wine and one full of oil. Each of them said, I broke the one full of wine. Both of them pay for the wine. One empty and one full; each of them said, I broke the empty one. Both of them pay for the empty one. If they broke one amphora. Each of them said, you broke it. Neither of them is liable.
HALAKHAH: “A person may be liable for the action of his bull,” etc. Rebbi Yudan asked: How is the court trial145This really is a continuation of examples to Mishnaiot 13–16 applying the principle that “the burden of proof is on the claimant”, even if the resulting judgment be logically inconsistent.? Let us hear from the following: “Two persons threw two pebbles and broke two jugs, one full of wine and one full of oil. Each of them said, I broke the one full of wine. Both of them pay for the wine. One empty and one full; each of them said, I broke the empty one. Both of them pay for the empty one. If they broke one amphora. Each of them said, you broke it. Neither of them is liable.