Mesorat%20hashas for Bava Kamma 30:28

רבי אלעזר משמיה דרב אמר

ANIMAL IS <i>MU'AD</i> NEITHER TO GORE&nbsp;… meaning that the compensation will not be in full, but only half-damages will be paid, which is in accordance with the Rabbis who say that for the unusual damage done by Horn [even] on the plaintiff's premises only half-damages will be paid.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. supra 14a; infra 24b. ');">²³</span> Read now the concluding clause: OX AFTER HAVING BECOME <i>MU'AD</i>, OX DOING DAMAGE ON THE PLAINTIFF'S PREMISES, AND MAN, which is in accordance with R. Tarfon who said that for the unusual damage done by Horn on the plaintiff's premises full compensation must be paid.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. supra 14a; infra 24b. ');">²³</span> Is the commencing clause according to the Rabbis and the concluding clause according to R. Tarfon? — Yes, since Samuel said to Rab Judah, 'Shinena,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra p. 60, n. 2. ');">²⁴</span> leave the Mishnah alone<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. supra p. 60, n. 3. ');">²⁵</span> and follow my view: the commencing clause is in accordance with the Rabbis, and the concluding clause is in accordance with R. Tarfon.' R. Eleazar in the name of Rab, however, said:

Explore mesorat%20hashas for Bava Kamma 30:28. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.