Commentary for Bava Kamma 4:1
שׁוֹר שֶׁנָּגַח אַרְבָּעָה וַחֲמִשָּׁה שְׁוָרִים זֶה אַחַר זֶה, יְשַׁלֵּם לָאַחֲרוֹן שֶׁבָּהֶם. וְאִם יֶשׁ בּוֹ מוֹתָר, יַחֲזִיר לְשֶׁלְּפָנָיו. וְאִם יֶשׁ בּוֹ מוֹתָר, יַחֲזִיר לְשֶׁלִּפְנֵי פָנָיו. וְהָאַחֲרוֹן אַחֲרוֹן נִשְׂכָּר, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, שׁוֹר שָׁוֶה מָאתַיִם שֶׁנָּגַח שׁוֹר שָׁוֶה מָאתַיִם, וְאֵין הַנְּבֵלָה יָפָה כְלוּם, זֶה נוֹטֵל מָנֶה וְזֶה נוֹטֵל מָנֶה. חָזַר וְנָגַח שׁוֹר אַחֵר שָׁוֶה מָאתַיִם, הָאַחֲרוֹן נוֹטֵל מָנֶה, וְשֶׁלְּפָנָיו, זֶה נוֹטֵל חֲמִשִּׁים זוּז וְזֶה נוֹטֵל חֲמִשִּׁים זוּז. חָזַר וְנָגַח שׁוֹר אַחֵר שָׁוֶה מָאתַיִם, הָאַחֲרוֹן נוֹטֵל מָנֶה, וְשֶׁלְּפָנָיו, חֲמִשִּׁים זוּז, וּשְׁנַיִם הָרִאשׁוֹנִים, דִּינַר זָהָב:
If an ox gored four or five oxen, one after the other, [and with all of them it were a tam, which pays from its body], it pays [a half-nezek] to the last of them [first. The Gemara explains the instance as one in which the nizak seized the ox of the mazik to collect from it, in which instance he becomes a shomer sachar (a hired watchman), so that when it leaves his hand and causes damage, the first nizak is liable for it, for which reason the last nizak receives a complete half-nezek.]; and if something remains, it reverts to the one (the nizak) before him; and if something remains (from that), it reverts to the one before him. And the very last (nizak) gains. These are the words of R. Meir. [This is what is meant: If something remains from the nezek, it reverts to the one before him. As when the half-nezek of the first were a hundred, and the half-nezek of the last, fifty, and the ox were worth two hundred. In the beginning, when this one's ox gored the ox of the first nizak, whose half-nezek was a hundred, the nizak owned a hundred in this ox, and its owner, a hundred. And when the nizak seized it and it gored under his hand, the owner should not lose his hundred in it, for the responsibility of guarding it was not his, but that of the nizak who seized it. And when it caused a half-nezek of fifty to the second (nizak), the first nizak loses fifty from his hundred, which he gives to the second nizak, and what is left, until a hundred, reverts to him, and the owner takes his hundred.] R. Shimon says: If an ox worth two hundred gored an ox worth two hundred and the carcass were worth nothing, the first takes a hundred and the second takes a hundred. If it afterwards gored an ox worth two hundred, the last (nizak) takes a hundred, and the one before [i.e., the preceding nizak] takes fifty zuz, and this one [the owner] takes fifty zuz. [For the first nizak owns half the ox, for which reason he pays half of its nezek. R. Shimon holds that the owner and the nizak are partners in the ox which causes damage and both are liable for its damages. How so? "If an ox worth two hundred, etc."] If it afterwards gored another ox worth two hundred, the last (nizak) takes one hundred, [a half from whoever it may be, for it pays from its body. So that it is found that the nizak before him, to whom half of it belonged, pays half of the hundred that the last one takes], and the one before him, fifty zuz, and the last two, a golden dinar (each), [twenty-five silver dinars (twenty-five zuz). The first two, the first nizak and the owner, each of whom owns a quarter (of the ox) — each pays a quarter of its damages.]
Rambam on Mishnah Bava Kamma
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Kamma
Rabbi Shimon says, “[If] an ox worth 200 gores an ox worth 200 and the carcass is not worth anything, this one gets 100 and this one gets 100. [If] it injures another ox worth 200, the [owner of the] ox last injured receives 100 and the owner of the previously injured ox receives 50. [If] it injures another ox worth 200, the [owner of the] ox last injured receives 100, the [owner of the] previously injured ox receives 50, and the first two receive 25.
This mishnah deals with the nature of the financial obligation of the owner of a harmless ox that has injured several oxen, without it ever becoming an attested danger. According to one opinion, the owner of the injured ox becomes new owner of the harmless ox, when the latter causes injury. The result of this ownership is that if the harmless ox causes further injury, the owner of the previously injured ox will have financial liability. The second opinion is that the owner the injured ox becomes a partner in the ownership of the injuring ox. In our mishnah we will see the manifestation of these two differing opinions.
First of all let us chart out two tables explaining the differences between Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Shimon. In this chart all oxen were worth 200 before the injuries. The numbers are how much each owner of the injured oxen will collect.
Amount left to owner of injuring ox
First ox injured
Second ox
Third ox
Rabbi Meir
0
0
100
100
Rabbi Shimon
25
25
50
100
According to Rabbi Meir, the owners of the previously injured oxen are considered the new owners of the injuring ox and therefore are fully responsible for subsequent damages. Only if money remains from the value of the injuring ox can these owners recover money for their own injured oxen.
According to Rabbi Shimon the owners of the previously injured oxen are considered partners in the ownership of the injuring ox. When an ox damages one other ox, they are now partners and they each get 100. When it injures again, the owner of the currently injured ox is a partner who gets half, meaning 100 and the previous two owners become partners in an ox worth 100, and each gets 50. If the ox should injure a third time, the owner of the currently injured ox is a partner and receives half, meaning 100. The owner of the second injured ox is now a half partner in an ox worth 100 and he gets 50. The fifty that is left in the worth of the original ox is split evenly between the original owner and the owner of the first injured ox, who are partners in that 50.