Translate

Powered By Blogger

11.3.25

Rambam, Laws of Monetary Damage chapter 2, laws 5 and 6. Tosphot on page 18 in Bava Kama.

The Rambam says in Laws of Monetary Damage chapter 2, laws 5 and 6. There is a doubt about an unusual case of pebbles. For example, if the animal kicked and then pebbles shot up, then this is a case of doubt. That is from the Gemara. Does an unusual act apply to pebbles, so that it would go down from half damage payment to a fourth damage payment? Or not? Another question in the Gemara is if warning applies to pebbles? Thus, they would go from a half to full payment. The Rambam leaves out this second question. Why? Rav Shach says because from the question about an unusual act of pebbles, we know there can be doubt about warning by pebbles. I do not see why? Maybe there is an unusual act by pebbles, and they have gone down from 1/2 to ¼, and now he gets warned and they go up from 1/4 to 1/2? Or they don’t. Maybe they stay down to 1/4. Or there is no unusual act, and they are ½ even if done by kicking. But then come warning, and they go up from ½ to full damage? And just as much, I am confused about Tosphot. They hold if there is warning, then that can apply whether there is change or not. But if there is no warning, then there is no change. Why? I cannot see this. Maybe there is no warning, and still if the animal kicks and shoots up pebbles, that goes down to ¼ damage whether there was warning or not? Or maybe even doing that many times changes nothing. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The רמב''ם says in נזקי ממון chapter ב', laws ה' and ו'. There is a doubt about an unusual case of pebbles. For example, if the animal kicked and then pebbles shot up, then this is a case of doubt. That is from the גמרא. Does an unusual act apply to צרורות, so that it would go down from half damage payment to a fourth damage payment? Or not? Another question in the גמרא is if warning applies to צרורות? Thus, they would go from a half to full payment. The רמב''ם leaves out this second question. Why? רב שך says because from the question about an unusual act of pebbles, we know there can be doubt about warning by צרורות. I do not see why? Maybe there is an unusual act by צרורות , and they have gone down from 1/2 to a fourth, and now he get warned and they go up from 1/4 to 1/2? Or they don’t. Maybe they stay down to 1/4. Or there is no unusual act, and they are ½ even if done by kicking. But then come warning, and they go up from ½ to full damage? And just as much, I am confused about תוספות . They hold if there is warning, then that can apply whether there is change or not. But if there is no warning, then there is no שינוי. Why? I cannot see this. Maybe there is no warning, and still if the animal kicks and shoots up צרורות, that goes down to ¼ damage whether there was warning or not? Or maybe even doing that many times changes nothing.