Commentary for Bava Kamma 34:12
אמר רבא בשלמא סומכוס קסבר כחו כגופו דמי אלא רבנן אי כגופו דמי כוליה נזק בעי לשלם ואי לאו כגופו דמי חצי נזק נמי לא לשלם
Our Rabbis taught: An animal is <i>Mu'ad</i> to walk in its usual way and to break [things]. That is to say, in the case of an animal entering into the plaintiff's premises and doing damage [either] with its body while in motion, or with its hair while in motion, or with the saddle [which was] upon it, or with the load [which was] upon it, or with the bit in its mouth, or with the bell on its neck,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' CF. supra, p. 6. ');"><sup>11</sup></span>
Tosafot on Bava Kamma
It seems that if a person throws a rock or arrow towards a vessel and another person comes along and shatters the vessel before the projectile strikes it, certainly the one who shattered the vessel (and not the one who threw the rock) is liable. In this instance we do not apply the rationale of “the second one broke the vessel.” simple logic call for us to distinguish between throwing a rock (toward a vessel) and throwing the vessel itself.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy