Commentary for Bava Kamma 110:8
א"ר מני בר פטיש מאן תנא מועד דסגי ליה בשמירה פחותה ר"י היא דתנן קשרו בעליו במוסירה ונעל לפניו כראוי ויצא והזיק אחד תם ואחד מועד חייב דברי ר"מ
suffices [to confer exemption]? It is R. Judah. For we have learnt: If the owner fastened his ox [to the wall inside the stable] with a cord or shut the door in front of it properly<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Withstanding a normal wind. ');"><sup>12</sup></span> and the ox got out and did damage, whether it was <i>Tam</i> or already <i>Mu'ad</i>, he would be liable; so R. Meir. R. Judah, however, says: In the case of <i>Tam</i> he would be liable, but in the case of <i>Mu'ad</i> exempt, for it is written, And his owner hath not kept him in<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XXI, 36. ');"><sup>13</sup></span>
Explore commentary for Bava Kamma 110:8. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.