Anche se gli dà (dice il pagamento), non è perdonato finché non chiede perdono, vale a dire. (Genesi 20: 7): "E ora, ritorna la moglie di quest'uomo (Abramo), ecc." E da dove deriva che non si dovrebbe essere crudeli, ma perdono? Da (Ibid. 17): "E Abrahamo pregò G d (che Avimelech fosse perdonato), e G d guarì Avimelech, ecc." Se uno dice (a un altro): accecare l'occhio, tagliarmi la mano, spezzarmi la gamba (e l'altro lo fa), è responsabile. (Se chiede :) "A condizione che io non sia responsabile?" [e il primo risponde: "Sì", nonostante ciò,] è responsabile. [Perché c'è un "Sì" che è come un "No." Il "Sì" in questo caso deve essere inteso come un "interrogatorio"; perché gli uomini non sono in grado di "rinunciare" al dolore fisico.] (Se uno dice a un altro :) Strappare i miei vestiti, rompere la mia brocca (e l'altro lo fa), è responsabile. (Se chiede :) "A condizione che io non sia responsabile?" [Anche se il primo risponde: "No"], non è responsabile. [Per il suo "No" è come un "Sì", come se gli dicesse: "Non te l'ho detto, a condizione che tu non sia responsabile?" Pertanto, non è responsabile, gli uomini non vogliono "rinunciare" al danno della proprietà.] (Se uno dice all'altro: "Fai così a quell'uomo", (e l'altro chiede :) "A condizione che io non sia responsabile?" è responsabile sia per (lesioni a) il suo corpo sia (danni a) la sua proprietà.
Rambam on Mishnah Bava Kamma
Even though he gives him [money] he is not forgiven until...
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma
על מנת לפטור חייב – if the one who wounds would ask the one wounded, on condition to exempt me , you say, “blind my eye,” and the wounded responded “yes,” for it is not the manner of human beings to pardon on the pain of their bodies, but if a person says to his fellow: “break my pitcher,” and the one doing damage asked: “on condition that you will exempt me you state this,” even though the one who suffered damage responded to him negatively, this “no” is like a “yes”, and it is as if he said to: “but didn’t I not say to you on condition that I would be exempt?” And therefore, he is exempt, for such is the manner of human beings to pardon on monetary damages.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Kamma
Introduction
The first half of our mishnah teaches that a person is not forgiven for embarrassing another person merely by paying whatever fine was imposed upon him. He must ask for forgiveness. When he does the injured person should be gracious and forgive him fully and speedily.
The second half of the mishnah teaches several laws concerning a person who asks someone to injure him or injure his property.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Rambam on Mishnah Bava Kamma
They said there is a 'yes' that is like a 'no', and it is this person that said to him regarding damage to his body on condition to be exempt. As is known that a person is not forgiving in something like this, and therefore he's obligated.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Kamma
As we explained in the introduction, section one states that a person is not forgiven for embarrassing another until he asks the injured party for forgiveness. The mishnah learns this from the story of Avimelech and Abraham in Genesis 20. According to the story, when Abraham came to Gerar he told the people there that Sarah was his sister. Avimelech, thinking that Sarah was available, took her, with the intent of having relations with her. In a dream God warned him not to touch Sarah. God told Avimelech to return Sarah to Abraham and to ask him to pray on Avimelech’s behalf so that he would not be punished for taking Sarah. From this story our Mishnah learns that merely rectifying the crime is not enough. Avimelech was not forgiven for his (almost crime) just by returning Sarah. He had to ask Abraham for forgiveness as well. We also learn from this story that the wronged person should forgive easily. Abraham did not delay in praying for Avimelech but immediately answered his request.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Kamma
If a man said, “Blind my eye”, or “Cut off my hand”, or “Break my foot”, he [that does so] is liable. [If he added] “On the condition that you will be exempt”, he is still liable. [If he said] “Tear my garment”, or “Break my jug”, he that does so is liable. [If he added] “On the condition that you will be exempt”, he is exempt. [If he said], “Do so to so-and-so, on the condition that you will be exempt, he is liable, whether it was [an offense] against his person or his property. Section two deals with a person who asks someone else to injure him or his property. We learn several general principles from the mishnah. First of all, if a person asks another person to injure him or his property, without saying that the injurer will be exempt, the injurer is liable. Second, if he asks the other person to injure his body, even if he says that the injurer will be exempt, the injurer is liable. Third, if he asks the other person to injure a third party, again even if he says that the injurer will be exempt, the injurer is liable. Note the beautiful, carefully crafted structure of the last section of this mishnah. It is a classic example of mishnaic style.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Kamma
Questions for Further Thought: • What is the connection between the first and second halves of the mishnah? • According to section two, if a person asks another person to injure his body and tells him that he will be exempt if he should do so, he is nonetheless liable. Why? What is the difference between bodily injuries and damages to property?
