Musar for Bava Kamma 51:3
ולא תהא שן ורגל חייבת ברשות הניזק אלא חצי נזק מק"ו מקרן ומה קרן שברה"ר חייבת ברשות הניזק אינה משלמת אלא חצי נזק שן ורגל שברשות הרבים פטורה אינו דין שברשות הניזק משלם חצי נזק
But should we not let Tooth and Foot doing damage on the plaintiff's premises involve the liability for half damages only because of the following <i>a fortiori</i>: If in the case of Horn, where there is liability for damage done even on public ground, there is yet no more than half payment for damage done on the plaintiff's premises,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In accordance with the Rabbis who differ from R. Tarfon; v. supra p. 125. ');"><sup>5</sup></span> does it not follow that, in the case of Tooth and Foot where there is exemption for damage done on public ground,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Supra p. 132. ');"><sup>6</sup></span>
Shenei Luchot HaBerit
Shenei Luchot HaBerit
Shenei Luchot HaBerit
אדם הראשון, first man, was considered מועד לעולם, forewarned from the outset (Baba Kama 3). This means that he was unable to make excuses for his sin, having been told by G–d directly what he must not do. יעקב on the other hand, is described as איש תם (the choicest of human beings), and only had to pay half for any sins he had committed (i.e. cost of any damage he caused), since he never died (cf. Taanit 5, that יעקב אבינו לא מת). This means that though he "died," he did not die completely as was explained in that context (see Akeydat Yitzchak chapter 32).