Commentary for Gittin 97:12

א"כ מאי לא בא הכתוב ועוד מאי ק"ו להקדש ועוד הא אמר רב אשי

— I may still say that [these words refer to the case where] our ox gored the ox of the Sanctuary, for R. Akiba held the same view as R. Simeon b. Menasya, as it has been taught: R. Simeon b. Menasya says: If an ox of the Sanctuary gores an ox of a layman, there is no liability, but if the ox of a layman gores an ox of the sanctuary, whether it was <i>tam</i><span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos. ');">¹²</span> or <i>mu'ad</i>,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos. ');">¹²</span> the owner has to pay compensation in full.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' B.K. 37b, q.v. for notes. ');">¹³</span> If that is the case, why should you say that R. Akiba and R. Ishmael differ [as to what is to be done] when the best of the claimant is equal to the worst of the defendant? Perhaps in that case both agree that we assess on the land of the claimant,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And where the claimant's best equals the defendant's worst, the latter will perhaps suffice according to all opinions. ');">¹⁴</span> and their dispute here<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the Baraitha quoted supra 48b. ');">¹⁵</span> is the same as that between R. Simeon b. Menasya and the Rabbis, R. Akiba adopting the same view as R. Simeon b. Menasya and R. Ishmael adopting the view of the Rabbis?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., R. Akiba differed from R. Ishmael only in the second part of his statement, regarding the Sanctuary, but not the first. ');">¹⁶</span> — If that were the case, why should R. Akiba have said 'The whole purpose of the text etc.,'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which indicates that the interpretation of the verse (Ex. XXII, 4) is the point at issue. ');">¹⁷</span> and again, what means 'All the more so in the case of the Sanctuary'?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [As according to the view requiring full payment in all cases, the quality of the payment for damage done to sacred property may be higher than that paid for damage done to ordinary property, and in fact nothing less than the very best of the defendant's estate would suffice.] ');">¹⁸</span> And besides, R. Ashi has told us,

Explore commentary for Gittin 97:12. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.