Talmud Yerushalmi
Yerushalmi Bava Kamma 4:7 ירושלמי בבא קמא ד׳:ז׳
Part of: Chapter 4
Reading: Hebrew · Simple EnglishHebrew · Faithful translationHebrew onlyHebrew · Simple EnglishHebrew · Faithful translationHebrew onlySimple English onlyFaithful translation onlySide by side
משנה: שׁוֹר הָאִשָּׁה שׁוֹר הַיְתוֹמִין שׁוֹר אֶפִּיטְרוֹפּוֹס שׁוֹר הַמִּדְבָּר שׁוֹר הַהֶקְדֵּשׁ שׁוֹר הַגֵּר שֶׁמֶּת וְאֵין לוֹ יוֹרְשִׁין הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ חַיָיבִין מִיתָה. רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר שׁוֹר הַמִּדְבָּר שׁוֹר הַהֶקְדֵּשׁ שׁוֹר הַגֵּר שֶׁמֶּת וְאֵין לוֹ יוֹרְשִׁין פְּטוּרִין מִן הַמִּיתָה מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵין לָהֶן בְּעָלִים.
MISHNAH: A bull belonging to a woman, a bull belonging to orphans114Minors for whom no guardian was appointed., a bull under a guardian115Property of orphans., a wild bull, a bull of Temple property, a bull belonging to a proselyte who died without heirs, these are subject to the death penalty116If they killed a person.. Rebbi Jehudah says that a wild bull, a bull of Temple property, a bull belonging to a proselyte who died without heirs117Whose estate is ownerless; cf. Qiddushin 1:1, Note 30., are not subject to the death penalty since they have no owners.
MISHNAH: A bull belonging to a woman, a bull belonging to orphans114Minors for whom no guardian was appointed., a bull under a guardian115Property of orphans., a wild bull, a bull of Temple property, a bull belonging to a proselyte who died without heirs, these are subject to the death penalty116If they killed a person.. Rebbi Jehudah says that a wild bull, a bull of Temple property, a bull belonging to a proselyte who died without heirs117Whose estate is ownerless; cf. Qiddushin 1:1, Note 30., are not subject to the death penalty since they have no owners.
הלכה: שׁוֹר הָאִשָּׁה שׁוֹר הַיְתוֹמִין כול׳. מַאי טַעֲמָא דְרִבִּי יוּדָן. וְהוּעַד בִּבְעָלָיו וְלֹא יִשְׁמְרֶנּוּ. אֵין בְּעָלִים לָאֵילּוּ לְעִנְיַין נְזָקִין. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי הוֹשַׁעְיָה. לְעִנְיַין נְזָקִין רִבִּי מֵאִיר מְחַיֵיב וְרִבִּי יוּדָן פּוֹטֵר. לַכּוֹפֶר מָה. רִבִּי פְדָת בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי הוֹשַׁעְיָה. הַכֹּל מוֹדִין בַּכּוֹפֶר שֶׁהוּא חַיָיב. וְאִית דְּאָמְרִין. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יַנַּאי. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁחוֹלְקִין בִּנְזָקִין כָּךְ הֵן חוֹלְקִין בַּכּוֹפֶר. רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה בָּעֵי קוֹמֵי רִבִּי זְעִירָא. הֵיךְ עָבְדִין עוֹבְדָא. אָמַר לֵיהּ. כְּרִבִּי הוֹשַׁעְיָה. לְעִנְיַין נְזָקִין רִבִּי מֵאִיר מְחַיֵיב וְרִבִּי יוּדָן פּוֹטֵר. הָא לַכּוֹפֶר דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל חַיָיב.
HALAKHAH: “A bull belonging to a woman, a bull belonging to orphans,” etc. What is Rebbi Jehudah’s reason? “It was testified to before its owners and they did not watch it;118Ex. 21:29. Tosephta 4:6. The verse speaks of the notorious bull; one seems to understand that no ownerless bull can be brought to court.” those have no owners who could be responsible for damages. Rebbi Hoshaia stated: In matters of damages119Damage claims are possible only against humans. One must refer to a bull who did damage before its owner dedicated it to the Temple, or was property of a proselyte while the latter was still living., Rebbi Meïr declares liable but Rebbi Jehudah declares not liable. What about weregilt? Rebbi Pedat in the name of Rebbi Hoshaia: Everybody agrees that he is liable for weregilt. But some say, Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Yannai: Just as they disagree for damages so they disagree for weregilt120The language of the Tosephta seems to support R. Joḥanan. The formulation of the Babli, 44b (in the name of Rav Huna and a baraita) is inconclusive. (The Babli, 44a, reports a similar disagreement, between Rav and Samuel, referring to Mishnah 7.). Rebbi Jeremiah asked before Rebbi Ze‘ira: How does one actually act? He said to him, following Rebbi Hoshaia that in matters of damages, Rebbi Meïr declares liable but Rebbi Jehudah declares not liable; therefore, in matters of weregilt everybody agrees that he is liable.
HALAKHAH: “A bull belonging to a woman, a bull belonging to orphans,” etc. What is Rebbi Jehudah’s reason? “It was testified to before its owners and they did not watch it;118Ex. 21:29. Tosephta 4:6. The verse speaks of the notorious bull; one seems to understand that no ownerless bull can be brought to court.” those have no owners who could be responsible for damages. Rebbi Hoshaia stated: In matters of damages119Damage claims are possible only against humans. One must refer to a bull who did damage before its owner dedicated it to the Temple, or was property of a proselyte while the latter was still living., Rebbi Meïr declares liable but Rebbi Jehudah declares not liable. What about weregilt? Rebbi Pedat in the name of Rebbi Hoshaia: Everybody agrees that he is liable for weregilt. But some say, Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Yannai: Just as they disagree for damages so they disagree for weregilt120The language of the Tosephta seems to support R. Joḥanan. The formulation of the Babli, 44b (in the name of Rav Huna and a baraita) is inconclusive. (The Babli, 44a, reports a similar disagreement, between Rav and Samuel, referring to Mishnah 7.). Rebbi Jeremiah asked before Rebbi Ze‘ira: How does one actually act? He said to him, following Rebbi Hoshaia that in matters of damages, Rebbi Meïr declares liable but Rebbi Jehudah declares not liable; therefore, in matters of weregilt everybody agrees that he is liable.