Yerushalmi Bava Kamma 8:1 ירושלמי בבא קמא ח׳:א׳

MISHNAH: One who injures another person owes him under five categories: Damages, suffering, medical costs, loss of earnings¹Payment of medical costs and replacement of lost earnings are biblical obligations, Ex. 21:19., and embarrassment. How are damages determined? If he blinded his eye, or cut off his hand, or broke his leg, one considers it as if he were sold as a slave; how much was he worth and how much is he worth now²Since slaves are bought for their working power (Halakhah 7:1), what has to be estimated is the loss of earning power.. Suffering: If he burned him with a spit, or with a nail, even on his fingernails where it does not cause a wound³If no open wound is caused, no damages are due. The payment for pain is independent of the payment for damages., one estimates how much a person in his state would ask to be paid in order to be willing to suffer such pain.

HALAKHAH: “One who injures another person,” etc. It was stated⁴Tosephta 9:1.: “One who injures another person in five [respects] pays him for five categories, in four he pays him four, in three he pays him three, in two he pays him two, in one he pays him one.” How? If he hit him on his hand and severed it, he pays him five times: Damages, suffering, medical costs, loss of earnings, and embarassment. If he hit him on his hand and it became swollen⁵Since the damage is not permanent, no damages are due., he pays four times: Suffering, medical costs, loss of earnings, and embarassment. If he hit him on his head which became swollen, he pays three times, suffering, medical costs, loss of earnings⁶Maimonides (Hilkhot Hovel umazziq 2:2) and Rosh (Chapter 8, §1) read: embarrassment. This is reasonable since a person with a swollen head is embarrassed but not disabled. But the Genizah text supports the Leiden reading; the error, if it is one, must be a very old one. E hs a lacuna at this place.. At a place where it is not visible he pays twice, suffering and medical costs⁷This supports the reading of Maimonides and Rosh.. With a tome⁸Latin tomus “cut”, Greek τόμος “piece, slice”. There is no injury or hurt; therefore payment is only due for embarassment. E reads בניומוס, a scribal error. A differently formulated parallel in Sifra Emor Pereq 20(4) reads בְּלוּחַ וּבְפִינַקְס וּבְטוֹמוֹס נְייָרוֹת “with a plank, or a wooden writing tablet (πίναξ), or a bundle of papers.” in his hand he pays only once, for embarrassment.

Rebbi Jeremiah asked: If he severed his hand and returned and severed the arm, does he have to pay additionally for the pain inflicted the first time⁹If the case came to court only after the second attack. In the Babli, 85b, it is considered obvious that suffering and embarrassment must be treated separately for each attack whereas the other payments can be combined.?

It is written: “An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth¹⁰Lev. 24:20, speaking of payment for either animal or man..” At another place, He says: “Do not be softhearted.¹¹Deut. 19:21, 25:12.” One refers to inadvertent acts, the other to intentional ones¹²Cf. Sifry Deut. 293. The quote Deut. 19:21 refers to the punishment of the perjured witnesses. Since in injury cases the false accuser wanted to extort money and therefore would have to pay money, it is concluded that Deut. 25:12 which prescribes punishment for intentional injury also must mean payment of money. Therefore Lev. 24:20 refers to payment for unintentional injury.. He could mention the inadvertent but not mention the intentional. But if the inadvertent had been mentioned but not the intentional, I would have said that for the inadvertent act he shall pay money, for the intentional [have his hand cut off. Therefore it was necessary to mention the intentional. Or if the intentional had been mentioned but not the inadvertent, I would have said that for the intentional act he shall pay money, for the inadvertent]¹³Text missing in the Leiden ms., supplied from E and supported by the Genizah text. he should not pay at all. Therefore it was necessary to mention both inadvertent and intentional. And if he blinded a blind man or cut off the arm of an amputee, how could one fulfill: “Do to him as he intended to do to his brother”¹⁴Deut. 19:19, referring to the punishment of perjured witnesses. The quote is confirmed by all three ms. sources but probably the reference should be to Lev. 23:19: “As a person injures another, so should be done to him”. The Babli, 84a, in quoting a similar baraita refers to Lev. 24:22: “A uniform law shall it be for you”; cf. also Sifra Emor Pereq 20(7).? This indicates that he only pays money.

“Suffering: If he burned him with a spit, or with a nail, even on his fingernails where it does not cause a wound.” How is this¹⁵The Genizah and E texts do not have דמי; cf. Chapter 7, Note 50.? If he wounded him so that he lost blood, it already is written: “A wound for a wound¹⁶Ex. 21:25. Of the three expressions mentioned there, the third one, חַבּוּרָה, “contusion”, already seems to be subsumed under the first, כְּוִיָּה, “burn”, or the second, פצע, “open wound”. A similar discussion is in the Babli, 84b..” Why does the verse say “a contusion”? To tell you that if he burned him with a spit on the palm of his hand and it swelled, on the sole of his foot and it swelled, or he put snow or ice on him at a place which is not visible, he has to pay his medical expenses.¹⁷A somewhat different text is in Mekhilta dR. Ismael Neziqin 8: “If he wounded him so that he lost blood, it already is written: ‘A wound for a wound’; if he caused a contusion, is there not written ‘a contusion for a contusion’? Why is written ‘a burn for a burn’? To tell you that if he burned him with a spit on the palm of his hand or on the sole of his foot and it was not noticeable, or he put snow on his head and gave him a cold, he has to pay for his suffering.”

“One estimates how much a person in his state would ask to be paid in order to be willing to suffer such pain.” Rebbi Ze‘ira said, one sees a person and asks him, how much would you give that such pain would not be inflicted on you? And what he says, he has to give¹⁸The court determines the payment for suffering by asking a randomly chosen member of the public. The amount indicated by that person is imposed on the attacker.. Mar Uqba said, the Mishnah is “how much a person would ask to be paid,” and you say so? But one sees a person and asks him, how much would you ask that such pain not be inflicted on you? And what he says, he has to give¹⁹Mekhilta dR. Ismael Neziqin 8 explains this as the meaning of payment “burn for burn”.. Ben Azai said, one gives food invalidity²⁰Tosephta 9:3. The Erfurt text reads “the cost of food”, for the additional cost of a sick person’s diet.. What is food invalidity? Before that, I was eating lentils and vegetables but now I can only eat eggs and chicken. What he asks one²¹The court imposes the additional costs on the attacker. gives him. Rebbi Yose ben Jacob said, a Roman who was sick would not go into battle until he could eat all he had been missing those days.