Commentary for Bava Kamma 12:4
רבינא אמר לאתויי הא דתנן הכותל והאילן שנפלו לרה"ר והזיקו פטור מלשלם נתנו לו זמן לקוץ את האילן ולסתור את הכותל ונפלו בתוך הזמן והזיקו פטור לאחר הזמן חייב
Rabina said: To include that which we have learnt: 'A wall or a tree which accidentally fell into a Public thoroughfare and did damage, involves no liability for compensation. If an order had been served [by the proper authorities] to fell the tree and pull down the wall within a specified time, and they fell within the specified time and did damage, the immunity holds goods, but if after the specified time, liability is incurred.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' B.M. 117b. ');"><sup>3</sup></span>
Tosafot on Bava Kamma
A wall or a tree that fell into the public domain and caused damage, [the owner is] exempt from paying. This is our text: A wall and a tree that fell into the public domain and damaged, the owner is exempt from paying.
And so too, is it written in the books of Rashi and in the book of Rav Alfas, and this is accurate. Since we see that even after they are notified to chop down the tree or dismantle the wall by a specific time they are exempt until the time passes, then certainly before they were ever notified they are exempt.
However, those books where it is written: the owner is liable to pay before he was notified to cut down the tree and dismantle the wall, are not understandable. For if even before the owner was notified to chop down the tree or dismantle the wall he is liable, it is not likely to be lenient with him, to exempt him, when they notify him to cut down the tree or dismantle the wall. Logic dictates that there is greater reason to hold him liable after he was notified than before he was notified.
And so too, is it written in the books of Rashi and in the book of Rav Alfas, and this is accurate. Since we see that even after they are notified to chop down the tree or dismantle the wall by a specific time they are exempt until the time passes, then certainly before they were ever notified they are exempt.
However, those books where it is written: the owner is liable to pay before he was notified to cut down the tree and dismantle the wall, are not understandable. For if even before the owner was notified to chop down the tree or dismantle the wall he is liable, it is not likely to be lenient with him, to exempt him, when they notify him to cut down the tree or dismantle the wall. Logic dictates that there is greater reason to hold him liable after he was notified than before he was notified.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy