Mesorat%20hashas for Bava Kamma 67:19

א"ל אביי אם כן מצינו לרבי יהודה

<b><i>MISHNAH</i></b>. WHERE AN OX<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the state of Tam. ');">¹⁷</span> OF THE VALUE OF TWO HUNDRED [<i>ZUZ</i>] GORED AN OX OF THE SAME VALUE OF TWO HUNDRED [<i>ZUZ</i>] AND THE CARCASS HAD NO VALUE AT ALL, R. MEIR SAID THAT IT WAS WITH REFERENCE TO THIS CASE THAT IT IS WRITTEN, AND THEY SHALL SELL THE LIVE OX AND DIVIDE THE MONEY OF IT.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XXI, 35. ');">¹⁸</span> R. JUDAH, HOWEVER, SAID: THIS IS CERTAINLY THE <i>HALACHAH</i>,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That half-damages should be paid in the case of Tam. ');">¹⁹</span> BUT WHILE YOU FULFIL [BY THIS RULING THE INJUNCTION], 'AND THEY SHALL SELL THE LIVE OX AND DIVIDE THE MONEY OF IT,' YOU DO NOT FULFIL [THE NEXT INJUNCTION], 'AND THE DEAD OX ALSO THEY SHALL DIVIDE.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As in the case specified by R. Meir the carcass had no value at all. ');">²⁰</span> THE CASE DEALT WITH BY SCRIPTURE IS THEREFORE WHERE AN OX OF THE VALUE OF TWO HUNDRED [<i>ZUZ</i>] GORED AN OX OF THE SAME VALUE OF TWO HUNDRED [<i>ZUZ</i>] AND THE CARCASS WAS WORTH FIFTY <i>ZUZ</i>: ONE PARTY WOULD HERE GET HALF OF THE LIVING OX TOGETHER WITH HALF OF THE DEAD OX<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Amounting altogether to one hundred and twenty-five zuz. The plaintiff would thus get seventy-five zuz in respect of the damage that amounted to one hundred and fifty zuz. Together with the fifty of the carcass of his ox the sum total will be one hundred and twenty-five zuz. ');">²¹</span> AND THE OTHER PARTY WOULD SIMILARLY GET HALF OF THE LIVING OX TOGETHER WITH HALF OF THE DEAD OX. <b><i>GEMARA</i></b>. Our Rabbis taught: Where an ox of the value of two hundred [<i>zuz</i>] gored an ox of the same value of two hundred [<i>zuz</i>] and the carcass was worth fifty <i>zuz</i>, one party would get half of the living ox together with half of the dead ox and the other party would similarly get half of the living ox together with half of the dead ox. This is the [case of the goring] ox dealt with in the Torah, according to the view of R. Judah. R. Meir, however, says; This is not the [case of the goring] ox dealt with in the Torah, but where an ox of the value of two hundred [<i>zuz</i>] gored an ox of the same value of two hundred [<i>zuz</i>] and the carcass was of no value at all — this is the case regarding which it is laid down, <i>'And they shall sell the live ox and divide the money of it</i>.' But how could I [in this case] carry out [the other direction], <i>'And the dead ox also they shall divide'</i>? [This only means that] the diminution [in value] brought about by the death<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of the animal attacked resulting from the injuries inflicted upon it. ');">²²</span> has to be [compensated] to the extent of one-half out of the body of the living ox. Now, since [in the former case]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Specified by R. Judah, where the carcass was worth fifty zuz. ');">²³</span> according to both R. Meir and R. Judah one party will get a hundred and twenty-five [<i>zuz</i>]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., half of the value of the living ox and half of the value of the carcass. ');">²⁴</span> and the other party will similarly get a hundred and twenty-five [<i>zuz</i>], what is the [practical] difference between them? — Raba thereupon said: The difference arises where<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since the death of the attacked ox. ');">²⁵</span> there has been a decrease in the value of the carcass,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Before it has been sold. ');">²⁶</span> R. Meir maintains that the loss in the value of the carcass has to be [wholly] sustained by the plaintiff,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As according to R. Meir, the defendant has no interest whatsoever in the carcass. ');">²⁷</span> whereas R. Judah is of the opinion that the loss in the value of the carcass will be borne by the defendant to the extent of a half.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since according to R. Judah, both the defendant and the plaintiff have to divide the value of the carcass. ');">²⁸</span> Said Abaye to him:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Raba. ');">²⁹</span> If this be the case, will it not turn out that according to R. Judah

Explore mesorat%20hashas for Bava Kamma 67:19. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.