Commentary for Bava Kamma 4:20

ובער זו השן וכן הוא אומר (מלכים א יד, י) כאשר יבער

Why this differentiation? If Goring is termed Principal because it is expressly written, If it will gore,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 2, n. 13. ');">¹⁵</span> why should this not apply to Collision, as it is also written, If it will collide?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XXI, 35. ');">¹⁶</span> — That collision denotes goring, as it was taught: The text opens with collision<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XXI, 35. ');">¹⁶</span> and concludes with goring<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. 36. ');">¹⁷</span> for the purpose of indicating that 'collision' here denotes 'goring'. Why the differentiation between injury to man, regarding which it is written <i>If it will gore</i>,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 2, n. 13. ');">¹⁸</span> and injury to animal regarding which it is written <i>if it will collide</i>?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 3; n. 10. ');">¹⁹</span> — Man who possesses foresight is, as a rule, injured [only] by means of [wilful] 'goring',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As it is more difficult to injure a man than an animal. ');">²⁰</span> but an animal, lacking foresight, is injured by mere 'collision'. A [new] point is incidentally made known to us, that [an animal] <i>Mu'ad</i> to injure man is considered <i>Mu'ad</i> in regard to animal,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. infra 205. ');">²¹</span> whereas <i>Mu'ad</i> to injure animal is not considered <i>Mu'ad</i> in regard to man.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As it is more difficult to injure a man than an animal. ');">²⁰</span> 'Biting': is not this a derivative of Tooth? — No; Tooth affords the animal gratification from the damage while Biting affords it no gratification from the damage. 'Falling and Kicking'; are not these derivatives of Foot? — No; the damage of foot occurs frequently while the damage of these does not occur frequently. But what then are the derivatives which, R. Papa says, are not on a par with their Principals? He can hardly be said to refer to these, since what differentiation is possible? For just as Horn does its damage with intent and, being your property, is under your control, so also these [derivatives] do damage with intent and, being your property, are under your control! The derivatives of Horn are therefore equal to Horn, and R. Papa's statement refers to Tooth and Foot. 'Tooth' and 'Foot'- where in Scripture are they set down? — It is taught: And he shall send forth<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XXII, 4. ');">²²</span> denotes Foot, as it is [elsewhere] expressed, That send forth the feet of the ox and the ass.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Isa. XXXII, 20. ');">²³</span> And it shall consume<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XXII, 4. ');">²²</span> denotes Tooth as [elsewhere] expressed, As the tooth consumeth

Tosafot on Bava Kamma