Yerushalmi Bava Kamma 8:6 ירושלמי בבא קמא ח׳:ו׳

MISHNAH: He who hits another⁶¹The meaning of this sentence is not clear. ‘Arukh: He blows his horn into the victim’s ear. Rashi quotes the Arukh and adds his teacher’s explanation: He hit him on his ear. Maimonides in his Mishnah Commentary: He hit him with his fist. In his Code (חובל ומזיק 9:3): He hit him with his flat hand. pays him a tetradrachma⁶²The word סלע used in both Talmudim for tetradrachma is not the Hebrew “rock” but the Sumerian silà used in Accadic as the unit of volume (1/300 of a gur, כּוֹר).; Rebbi Jehudah says in the name of Rebbi Yose the Galilean, a mina⁶³100 denarii.. If he slapped him, he pays 200 zuz⁶⁴Accadic zūzum, from זוז “to split”, the half-šeqel piece, identified with the Roman denarius. The possession of 200 zuz disqualifies its holder from receiving public assistance (Mishnah Peah 8:8); it is a considerable sum., with the back of his hand he gives him 400 zuz. If he hurt him on his earlobe, tore out some of his hair, spat on him and the spit touched him, removed his stole, uncovered a woman’s hair⁶⁵A married woman will indicate her status by having her hair covered in public. In the Babli and some Mishnah mss. it is stated explicitly “uncovered a woman’s hair in public”., he pays 400 zuz; everything corresponding to his honor⁶⁶The sums stated in the Mishnah are maxima, applicable to the highest levels of society; the court may lower them in appropriate cases..
Rebbi Aqiba said, even the poorest in Israel are treated as aristocrats who lost their property⁶⁷He disagrees with the last statement of the preceding Mishnah; the sums mentioned are mandatory in all cases., for they are descendents of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. In a case where somebody uncovered a woman’s hair, she came before Rebbi Aqiba who obligated him to pay her 400 zuz. He said to him, Rabbi, give me some time, which he did. He watched her at the entrance of her courtyard and broke a flask before her which contained an as worth of oil⁶⁸A very small amount.. She uncovered her hair, splashed her hand with the oil and worked it onto her head. He had her observed by witnesses and came before Rebbi Aqiba, telling him, to such a one⁶⁹Who uncovers herself for a very small gain. I have to give 400 zuz? He told him, you did not say anything since a person who injures himself, while he is not allowed to do that⁷⁰Gen. 9:5, Deut. 4:15., is not liable, but others who injure him are liable; a person who cuts down his fruit trees, while he is not allowed to do that⁷¹Deut. 20:19; Ševi‘it 4:10, Notes 109–110., is not liable, but others who cut down his fruit trees are.

HALAKHAH: “He who hits another pays him a tetradrachma.” “Rebbi Aqiba said, even the poorest in Israel,” etc. Rav Qarni stated: For a kick, one. For an elbow, three. For sqlvnqyt fifteen⁷²In the parallel in Babli, 27b, the quote appears in Rav Ḥisda’s name. There, pushing with the elbow cost 3 tetradrachmas, a kick with the foot 5, and סנוקרת 13. The unexplained סנוקרת (which also is the reading of E here) according to R. Ḥananel (i. e., Gaonic tradition) means a hook with the fist under the chin; according to Rashi hitting somebody with a donkey saddle. The Genizah text reads יסקינוקינית, the Metivot fragment סקלוקינת. J. N. Epstein (ללקסיקון התלמודי 2/1 תרביץ p. 123–127) proposes Accadic sunkirtu (su-un-kir-tum) “camel’s hump” as origin. {Cf. Latin sculpturigo “scratching”, sculptorium “back scratcher” (E. G.).}. Somebody said in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: He who puts an Elder to shame has fully to pay for his shame. A person insulted Rebbi Jehudah ben Ḥanina⁷³The case is mentioned in Ketubot 4:8, Note 202.. The case came before Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish who fined him a pound of gold.

“If one spat on him and the spit touched him.” How far does the spit have to reach? On his body, on his garments?⁷⁴The question is not answered. One may conclude that there is no difference. The Babli, 91a, comes to the opposite conclusion, viz., that spitting on somebody’s garments is not punishable. But what is the rule if he spat and the spittle did not reach him? Rebbi Yose said, this implies that somebody who insults another person verbally is not liable⁷⁵Since certainly spitting is not punishable if the spit falls to the ground before it reaches the intended victim, verbal spit which never touches cannot be punishable (in contrast to contemporary Roman or Egyptian laws.).

Rebbi Abbahu stated before Rebbi Joḥanan: “You killed my ox, you cut down my fruit trees,” and the other says, I do not know, he is liable. He said to him, certainly you state that to the rabble⁷⁶As J. Levy notes, the unexplained words מקרילות (Genizah מקבילות ,(מקליקות are onomatopoetic and intended as an insult. The Babli in such a situation uses חִילֵּק וּבִילֵּק “split and desolation” to designate the totally unworthy. R. Abbahu’s statement is not worth to be heard since nobody can be responsible for an undocumented claim about which he notes his own ignorance.. He answered, it is my fault, they said the following: “We testify against X that he killed ox Y” and the other says, I do not know, he is liable. [He said, that was stated.]⁷⁷Not in the Leiden ms., added from the E and Genizah texts. R. Joḥanan notes that the statement in its present form is obviously true, hence unnecessary.
The Genizah text has a better version in R. Abbahu’s statement: “We testify against X that he killed Y’s ox or cut down his fruit trees.”