If one threw a stone into the public domain and killed someone, he is exiled. [Even though this sounds close to "witting," for one should take into account that there are always people in the public domain, we are speaking here of a refuse heap in the public domain where people are wont to relieve themselves at night, but rarely in the daytime (when he threw the stone). For this reason, he is exiled; for he is neither a willful offender nor completely blameless.] If, after the stone left his hand, the other stuck out his head and was struck by it (and killed), he is not liable, [it being written (Deuteronomy 19:5): "…and it find his neighbor" — to exclude his presenting himself.] If he threw the stone into his own domain and killed someone, if the latter had permission [from the owner] to enter there, he is exiled; if not, he is not exiled, it being written (Deuteronomy 19:5): "And one who comes upon his neighbor in the forest to chop wood, etc.": Just as a forest is a place that the slayer and the slain were permitted to enter, (so all such places are subsumed in this halachah) — to exclude the slayer's courtyard where both did not have the right to enter (but only the owner). Abba Shaul says: Just as the chopping of wood is a (merely) permitted activity, [i.e., if he wishes, he goes to chop; if not, not], so all (merely permitted activities are subsumed in the halachah) — to exclude a father beating his son, [the father doing a mitzvah], a teacher chastising his student, and a bailiff of beth-din (beating someone at beth-din's behest.)
Bartenura on Mishnah Makkot
זרק את האבן לרשות הרבים – and even though it is close to acting with premeditation, for he should have thought that people would always be found in the public domain. Here we are dealing with a dunghill that was made in the public domain to be removed from there during the daytime and occasionally, it happens that he sits thee, and because of this, he is exiled, but it is not negligence nor is it totally unavoidably preventable (i.e., victim of an accident).
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Makkot
Introduction
Mishnah two continues to define what killing is considered accidental such that it allows a killer to escape to a city of refuge.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Makkot
והוציא הלה את ראשו וקבלה פטור – As it is written (Deuteronomy 19:5): “[…the ax-head flies off the handle] and strikes the other [so that he dies. That man shall flee to one of these cities and live].”
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Makkot
If a man threw a stone into the public domain and killed a person, he goes into banishment. Rabbi Eliezer ben Jacob says: “If after the stone had left his hand another person put out his head and caught it, the thrower is exempt [from banishment].” One who throws a stone into the public domain has thereby committed a negligent act and is exiled if the stone kills. According to Rabbi Eliezer ben Jacob the stone must be thrown at the place where a person is standing, before the stone is thrown. If after the stone is thrown a person moves into its way he is not liable to be exiled. This is probably because he is less negligent, having thrown a stone to a place where no one was standing. However, according to the first opinion in the mishnah, merely throwing a stone to a place that might kill is enough to cause the thrower to be exiled.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Makkot
אם יש רשות לניזק – if the owner gave him permission to enter
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Makkot
If a man threw a stone into his [own] court and killed a person, then, if the victim had a right of entry there, the thrower goes into banishment, and if not, he does not go into banishment, as it says, “As when a man goes into the forest with his neighbor” (Deut. 19:5): the forest is a domain accessible to the victim and to the slayer and it therefore excludes the court of the householder where the victim has no right of entry. If a person throws a stone into his own courtyard and it kills a trespasser the thrower is not liable to be exiled. This is learned from the example of accidental killing mentioned in Deuteronomy 19:5, that of an accidental killing taking place in the forest. Just as the forest is a place where anyone may enter, so too any accidental killing can only occur in a place where the victim had permission to enter. An accidental killing which takes place on private property when the victim had not been given permission to enter will not make the killer liable for exile.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Makkot
מה חטיבת עצים רשות – if he wants to go up to chop [wood], and if he does not want to, he does not go up.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Makkot
Abba Shaul says: “Hewing of wood is an optional act and it therefore excludes a father beating his son, or a master disciplining his pupil, or an agent of the court [administering lashes].” Abba Shaul learns another law from the example given in the Torah, that of a person chopping wood. Chopping wood is a voluntary activity and therefore any accidental killing which will force the killer to go into exile must also entail voluntary activities. If however the striking was mandatory such as a father disciplining his son, a master his student or a court agent administering lashes, the accidental killer is exempt. When reading this mishnah, as harsh as it sounds we must remember that corporal discipline was an accepted part of all ancient societies.
