Talmud Bavli
Talmud Bavli

Commentary for Bava Kamma 169:10

במאי קא מיפלגי אמר רבה אשכחתינהו לרבנן בבי רב דיתבי וקאמרי הכא במכה ניתנה לאגד קמיפלגי

But even [if the calculation be made on the basis of] a mutilated arm, would it amount only to Pain and not also to Pain plus Degradation, as it is surely a humiliation that a part of the body should be taken away and thrown to dogs? — It must therefore mean that we estimate how much a man whose arm had by a written decree of the Government to be taken off by means of a drug would require that it should be cut off by means of a sword. But I might say that even in such a case no man would take anything [at all] to hurt himself [so much]? — It must therefore mean that we have to estimate how much a man whose arm had by a written decree of the Government to be cut off by means of a sword would be prepared to pay that it might be taken off by means of a drug. But if so, instead of TO BE PAID should it not be written 'to pay'? — Said R. Huna the son of R. Joshua: It means that payment to the plaintiff will have to be made by the offender to the extent of the amount which the person sentenced would have been prepared to pay.

Rashi on Bava Kamma

Permission was given to doctors to heal - and we do not say that God harms and He Himself heals.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Tosafot on Bava Kamma

Why is there a need for double language? One might have thought that the verse speaks only of healing from human injury but illness that comes from heaven should not receive medical intervention lest it appear as though one is undermining the decree of the king. The Torah then comes and says it is fine.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Rashi on Bava Kamma

Kol shekein: [All the more so] is it not good for me like this; as if you will be negligent with yourself, it will be a great disgrace for me - since they will call me an "ox that damages."
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Previous VerseFull ChapterNext Verse