Yerushalmi Makkot 2:4 ירושלמי מכות ב׳:ד׳

MISHNAH: If he threw the stone into his own courtyard and it killed, if the person damaged had the right to enter there, he is exiled, but if not, he is not exiled, as it is said, if somebody goes with another to a forest¹⁶Deut. 19:5 reads: If somebody goes with another to a forest to cut down trees; his hand was coming down with the axe to cut the tree, the iron was lost from the wood, found the other, and he died; this one has to flee to one of these towns and live. If the person killed was not in the trajectory of the flying object at the start, the thrower is not guilty of negligent homicide. (Babli 8a; Sifry Deut. 183).. Since the forest is a place where the person injured and the one causing the injury both may enter, this excludes a private courtyard where the person injured and the one causing the injury may not enter together. Abba Shaul says, since cutting down trees is a voluntary act, this excludes a father who hits his son¹⁸In the course of his duty as educator., a teacher who disciplines his student, and the court bailiff¹⁹Acting on the orders of the court in flogging people..

HALAKHAH: If he threw the stone into his (comrade)²⁰A scribal error, חבירו “his comrade” for חצירו “his courtyard.,” etc. Rebbi Yannai said, a butcher who was cutting up [a carcass] and hit somebody whether raising or descending has to go into exile. This follows what Rebbi Huna said: A butcher who was cutting up [a carcass] and hit somebody in front of him in a descending motion goes into exile, in an ascending motion does not go into exile. In his back, in an ascending motion he goes into exile, in a descending motion he does not go into exile²¹(Babli 7b). A butcher is cutting up a cattle carcass into quarters using a meat cleaver. He holds the cleaver behind his back, raises it over his head, and brings it down in front to split the animal. Therefore, the ascending motion behind his back is a necessary prelude to the descending motion in front, and is part of a descending motion in the sense of Mishnah 1. An ascending motion in front and the following descending motion in his back are both classified as ascending; an accident during this motion does not qualify to send the perpetrator into exile.. Rebbi Isaac said, each case goes by its circumstances. If somebody sat on a bed during the day, and it is not usual to find a baby in a bed during the day, he goes into exile. During the night, when it is usual to find a baby in a bed during the night, he does not go into exile. If somebody sat on a crib during the day, and it is usual to find a baby in a crib during the day, he does not go into exile. During the night, when it is not usual to find a baby in a crib during the night, he goes into exile²²A person sits on a bed or a crib without looking whether a baby is lying there and by his action kills the baby. If he could reasonably have expected to find a baby there, his action is murder; otherwise it is involuntary homicide which qualifies for exile. During the day, the baby is put in a movable crib, so the mother can have him close by at all times. During the night, the baby is in his mother’s bed (1K. 3:19)..

²³This is from Baba qamma 3:8 (ק, Notes 112–117). While the origin of the text clearly is in Bava qamma, neither text is a copy of the other; they are derived from a common source. “Liable” and “not liable” refer to the payments due for personal injury claims. Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, if he was splitting wood in his courtyard, when a worker entered to collect his wages, and a splinter ricocheted and injured him, he is liable. If he died, he does not go into exile, for it is not like a forest. Rebbi Ḥanina²⁴Read with ק “R. Hiyya” (the Elder). stated, he is not liable. They do not disagree. What Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, when they did not see him. But what Rebbi Ḥiyya stated, when they saw him²⁵The occurrences of “liable” and “not liable” should be exchanged, following ק.. When they did not see him, from the moment he told him: enter, should he not be liable? Rebbi Ḥiyya stated, he is not liable. Since he told him: enter, he has to take precautions. Some would say, since he told him to enter, it becomes like the courtyard of partners. Rebbi Ḥiyya²⁶R. Ḥiyya bar Abba. in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Partners acquire from one another in a courtyard; they object to one another in a courtyard²⁷In a condominium courtyard, only outdoor activities (other than access to the houses built around the courtyard) agreeable to all parties can be performed. Cf. Nedarim 5:1 (Note 4)., and are mutually liable for damages. But did not Rav say, if he filled the entire public domain? This did not fill the entire public domain! Since they usually walk in the entire domain, it is as if he had filled the entire domain²⁸This refers to Halakhah Bava qamma 3:6 (Note 104). Would the right of access given to the worker be restricted to a narrow path of shortest access? The answer is negative; also in this aspect the property owner is liable..