Wół (tam) wart sto, który pobił wołu wartego dwieście, a padlina nic nie jest warta —on (nizak) bierze wołu. Wół wart dwieście, który wydał wołu wartego dwieście, a padlina nic nie jest warta—R. Meir powiedział: O tym jest napisane (Wj 21:35): „I sprzedadzą żywego wołu i podzielą jego pieniądze o połowę”. R. Juda rzekł do niego: „A to jest halacha”. [to znaczy z pewnością jest to halacha, którą daje mu sto, co stanowi połowę nezek.] Zadowoliłeś: „I sprzedadzą żywego wołu i podzielą jego pieniądze o połowę”, ale nie zaspokoiłeś ( Tamże): „a także tuszę podzielą na połówki”. Który (raczej jest przykładem tego, o czym pisze Pismo?) Wół warty dwieście, który wydał wołu wartego dwieście, a padlina warta jest pięćdziesiąt zuzów. Ten (nizak) zabiera połowę żywych (zwierzę) i połowę zmarłych, a ten (mazik) połowę żywych i połowę umarłych. [R. Meir i R. Yehudah różnią się pod względem wartości tuszy, gdy w chwili śmierci nie była nic warta, a potem zyskiwała na wartości, nadając się do karmienia psów lub do sprzedaży nie-Żydom. R. Meir utrzymuje, że ocena tuszy należy wyłącznie do nizaków, mazik nie otrzymuje nic z tego i płaci pół nezek. I taki jest cel oświadczenia R. Meira: „Jest o tym napisane:„ I sprzedadzą żywego wołu i podzielą jego pieniądze o połowę ”. To znaczy, że musi mu zapłacić pół nezek z sprzedaż żywego wołu i nic nie odlicza z powodu uznania tuszy. A R. Yehudah utrzymuje, że połowa oceny tuszy trafia do mazika, tak że kiedy mazik przyjdzie zapłacić półnezek nizakowi, odejmuje połowę oceny tuszy od chwili śmierci do czas sądu. I taki jest cel oświadczenia R. Judy do R. Meira: „Zaspokoiłeś:„ I sprzedają żywego wołu ”, ale nie zaspokoiłeś:„ a tuszę podzielą na pół ”,„ to konieczne. podzielić część oceny tuszy, a mazik wziąć połowę. Halacha jest zgodna z R. Yehudah.]
Rambam on Mishnah Bava Kamma
An ox is worth a manah (100 dinarim) gores an ox worth 200 (dinarim):
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma
וכן הלכה – certainly it is the Halakha that he gives him a Maneh which is one-half the damages, but this ox is not mentioned in the Torah , for you have fulfilled and sold the living ox, etc. And there is a dispute between Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehuda in the profit of the carrion, such as at the time of death, it was not worthy anything, but it increased in value afterwards and it was worthy of being fed to dogs or to be sold to a heathen. Rabbi Meir holds that there is raise in the value of the carrion of the ox that had suffered damages, and the one (i.e., the owner of the ox) who did the damage didn’t give anything other than providing one-half of his damage, and that is identical with that which Rabbi Meir said regarding this, as it states (Exodus 21:35): “[When a man’s ox injures his neighbor’s ox and it dies,] they shall sell the live ox and divide its price,” meaning to say, that he (i.e., the owner of the ox that did the damage) gives him half his damages from the monetary value of the living ox, and he doesn’t deduct for himself anything on account of the increase in value that the carrion gained. But Rabbi Yehuda holds that the one-half of the increased value of the carrion that caused damages and when [the owner of] the ox that caused damages pays to [the owner of] the ox that suffered damages his one-half damage, he deducts for himself one-half the increase in value of the carrion (according to the condition of the animal) from the time of [its] death until the time of their appearance in court (see Talmud Bava Kamma 34a), and that is exactly what Rabbi Yehuda stated to Rabbi Meir: You have fulfilled the Biblical verse in that you have sold the living animal, but you have not fulfilled [the Biblical mandate] (Exodus 21:35): “they shall also divide the dead animal,” for he has to divide the increase In value of the dead carrion and the [owner of the] one who did damage must give him [the owner of the one whose ox died] one-half. And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yehuda.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Kamma
Introduction
Our mishnah is concerned with the scenario mentioned in Exodus 21:35 (translation from JPS Tanakh): “When a man’s ox gores his neighbor’s ox and it dies, they shall sell the live ox and divide its price, they shall also divide the dead animal.” This system of payment of damages (applicable only to a “tam” or harmless ox) works well when both animals are worth the same amount. For instance if both the goring ox and the gored ox were worth 200 before the goring, and the carcass of the gored ox is 50, the two owners will sell both animals and split 200 and 50, leaving each with 125, or 75 less than the worth of their original ox. 75 is half of the 150 in damages caused to the gored ox, which matches our principle that when a tam injures, it’s owner pays half damages. However this system does not work well if the two oxen are of differing values. For instance, if the goring ox is worth 500 and the gored ox was worth 50 before the goring and its carcass is worth 30, the two owners will split 500 and 30, leaving each with 265. In this case the owner of the gored ox has benefited 215 since his original ox was worth 50. Likewise the system in the Torah does not work if the gored ox was worth more than the goring ox. If the goring ox was worth 50 and the gored ox 200 before the goring, and its carcass is worth 50, the two owners will split 50 and 50 leaving each with 50. The owner of the gored ox did not receive half damages, which would have been 100. The sages in our mishnah are dealing with the case in which we are able to fulfill the literal meaning of the verse in Exodus and still maintain our principle of half damages.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Rambam on Mishnah Bava Kamma
An ox worth 200 that gores an ox worth 200:...
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Kamma
If an ox worth 100 gored an ox worth 200, and the carcass is not worth anything, [the owner of the gored ox] takes the [live] ox. Section 1 describes a case where an ox worth 100 gored an ox worth 200. The owner of the goring ox owes 100, which are half damages. Since the carcass is not worth anything, the owner of the dead ox can just take the live ox as payment. This case is significantly different than the case described in Exodus. There the two owners sold both the live ox and the carcass and split the proceeds evenly. In this case there is no need for any selling or splitting of proceeds.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Rambam on Mishnah Bava Kamma
It's a dispute between Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Meir [when the carcass is increased in value].
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Kamma
If an ox worth 200 gored an ox worth 200 and the carcass is not worth anything, Rabbi Meir said, “If thus it was written, ‘they shall sell the live ox and divide its price, they shall also divide the dead animal’. Section 2, which contains Rabbi Meir’s opinion brings up a case closer to the one described in Exodus. Here the goring ox and the gored ox are both worth 200, but the carcass is not worth anything. The owner of the goring ox owes 100 and therefore the two owners sell the goring ox and split the proceeds.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Rambam on Mishnah Bava Kamma
And this is because the idea in our hands [is that] the carcass goes to the owner meaning to say to the damagee, and they evaluate it to him based on it's value. And this is what that it says in the pasuk 'and the dead one will be to him and he (the damager) will pay him half damages above if it was innocuous , or full damages if it was accustomed. Since what that it says Hashem (the torah) that they divide the money implying that he is obligated in only half damages. And this is what that they said the diminishment that the death causes- they split, and this is how it appears to one who examines it.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Kamma
Rabbi Judah said to him: “Such indeed is the halachah (, but you have fulfilled the verse ‘they shall sell the live ox and divide its price’, and you have not fulfilled the verse ‘they shall also divide the dead animal’. What case is this? If an ox worth 200 gored an ox worth 200 and the corpse is worth 50, this one takes half of the live ox and half of the dead ox, and this one takes half of the live ox and half of the dead ox. In section 3 Rabbi Judah points out that Rabbi Meir’s scenario only fulfills half of the description of the case in Exodus, that is selling the live animal. Rabbi Meir’s scenario does not include the need to sell the carcass, which is mentioned in Exodus. Therefore Rabbi Judah explains that Exodus describes the scenario as we explained in the introduction, where both oxen are worth 200 before the goring and the carcass is worth 50. They sell both the live and dead oxen and split the proceeds, leaving both parties with 125, 75 less than the amount with which they started. Since full damages were 150, 75 is equal to half damages.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Rambam on Mishnah Bava Kamma
And what that it's said and they should sell the live ox means to say that the innocuous pays half damage from itself like we said before, and there is not a dispute in these issues. But there is a dispute between Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehuda when a carcass is worth near the (time of) death, for example, a dinar and increases it's value and It's worth before they appear in court 2 dinarim, Rabbi Yehuda says (the pasuk says) "and also the dead they should split" and calculate to him a dinar and a half, and pays him half damages, since the dinar it increased, they split it
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Kamma
Questions for Further Thought: • As I pointed out in the introduction, the Torah is only dealing with a circumstance in which both oxen were of equal value. Why do you think the Torah only describes this circumstance? • Following up the first question, the Torah teaches the principle of half damages. Why do you think that it doesn’t just say that the injuring party pays half damages and instead it describes the process of selling both the live and dead animals? To whose advantage is this system?
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Rambam on Mishnah Bava Kamma
And Rabbi Meir says it's not for him except the dinar that it was worth at the time it died, like it's said, 'and the carcus will be to him', as if to say whatever the carcus increases in it's dead state, goes to the damagee. And just like this, when the carcus is not worth anything at all at the time of death, and afterwards it becomes worth money, R. Meir says, 'it's not calculated that money, rather pay him half damages, and this is what it says that we say 'and they should sell the living ox and divide the money. And R. Yehuda says 'calculate for half of the value of the carcus since it's value is all profit since it was not worth anything at the time of death. And this is what R. Yehuda says to disagree with him, keeps 'sell the live ox' he does not keep 'and also the dead they divide'. And the halakah is like R. Yehuda
