Если кто-то наносит удар по своему отцу или матери, не нанося раны, и если он наносит рану своему другу в Йом-Киппур, он несет ответственность за все (пять выплат). [И хотя на протяжении всей Торы, если кто-то совершает преступление, влекущее за собой полоски и денежные платежи, он получает полоски и не платит, здесь (в Йом Кипур) он платит и не получает полос, а Писание имеет четко оговоренную денежную оплату и не полосы для ранения своего соседа, а именно. (Второзаконие 19:21): «рука за руку»—денежный платеж. Давайте проанализируем это. Написано (Левит 24:19): «Как он это сделал, так и будет с ним». Почему же тогда нужно писать: «рука за руку»? Включая ранение своего соседа в Йом Кипур как платящего и не получающего нашивки.] Р. Иегуда говорит: не бывает бошета (платы) рабам, [написано (Второзаконие 25:11): «Если люди сражаются вместе, человек и его брат "—тот, кто входит в «братство», чтобы исключить связующего, который не является. Галаха не соответствует Р. Иегуде.]
Rambam on Mishnah Bava Kamma
He strikes his father or mother and did not cause...
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma
החובל בחבירו ביה"כ חייב – even though that in the entire Torah , a person who violates a transgression for which he is liable for flogging and payment, he is flogged but does not pay. Here, he pays and is not flogged. For in the commentary, the Torah widened the scope of the law concerning a person who strikes his fellow for payment and not for stripes, from what is written (Deuteronomy 19:21): “hand for hand,” which is money since it is written (Leviticus 24:19): “as he has done so shall it be done to him.” Why does it say “hand for hand?” But rather to include a person who strikes his fellow on Yom Kippur that pays and does not get flogged.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Kamma
If a man struck his father or his mother and inflicted no wound, or if he wounded his fellow on Yom Kippur, he is liable for all five counts. Section one teaches a few laws, for which we will find the opposite scenario in mishnah five. There we will learn, as we have learned in other places, that a person cannot receive two punishments for the same crime. Inflicting a wound on one’s father or mother is a capital crime (Exodus 21:15) as is inflicting a wound on the Sabbath. Therefore if he were to perform one of these acts he would be obligated for the death penalty and therefore exempt from a monetary fine. However, in our mishnah he did not commit a crime for which he could receive the death penalty, and therefore he is liable for the monetary fine. Striking one’s parents without causing a wound is not a crime for which one would receive the death penalty. Likewise, inflicting a wound on Yom Kippur, as all forbidden acts on Yom Kippur is punishable by “kareth” (cutting off) and not the death penalty.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Rambam on Mishnah Bava Kamma
We already explained that from the main rules that are in our hand, a man does not get lashes and pay, rather that if a man does something that obligates him in lashes and payment, he gets lashes and does not pay. With the exception of one who wounds his friend on the day of atonement only, that he pays and does not receive lashes, because the passage is clear, with one who wounds that he should pay no matter what. And that is what it means when it says 'a hand for a hand'. And the explanation that comes from this, that it is something given from hand to hand, and what is it?.. money. Since after that it says that as he did should be done to him, that it did not need to say 'hand to hand'. And this is idea that the torah clearly included, one who wounds his friend (is obligated) in payment. And the laws is not like Rebbi Yehudah.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma
רבי יהודה אומר אין לעבדים בושת – as it is written (Deuteronomy 25:11): “If two men get into a fight with each other,” for whom that he has brotherhood, excluding a slave who lacks brotherhood. Ut the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehuda.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Kamma
If he wounded a Hebrew slave, he is liable on all five counts, except loss of income if it was his slave. If he wounded a Canaanite slave (non-Jewish he is liable on all five counts. Rabbi Judah says: “Slaves do not receive compensation for indignity.” Section two deals with injuring slaves. There are two kinds of slaves in Jewish law, a Jewish slave and a non-Jewish slave. If one injures a Jewish slave he is obligated for all of the payments unless he injured his own slave. His own slave performs work for him and therefore there would be no sense in paying the slave for loss of work. If one injures a non-Jewish slave he is obligated for all of the payments. Rabbi Judah disagrees. In his opinion slaves do not receive payment for indignity since they are already in a position of constant indignity.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Bava Kamma
Questions for Further Thought: • Why do you think that when an ox injures a human its owner is only obligated to pay for the injury, whereas when a human injures another human, he must make five different types of payment? • What do you think Rabbi Judah would say about indignity payments for Jewish slaves?
