Bava Kamma 4

וטמא מת תולדותיהן לאו כיוצא בהן דאילו אב מטמא אדם וכלים ואילו תולדות אוכלין ומשקין מטמא אדם וכלים לא מטמא

and the Person who has been in contact with a human corpse.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. XIX, 11-22. ');">¹</span>

הכא מאי אמר רב פפא יש מהן כיוצא בהן ויש מהן לאו כיוצא בהן

[In this connection] their Resultants<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the objects rendered defiled by coming in contact with any Primary Defilement. ');">²</span>

ת"ר ג' אבות נאמרו בשור הקרן והשן והרגל

are not equal to them in law; for a primary defilement<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Such as any one of these three and the others enumerated in Kelim I. ');">³</span>

קרן מנלן דת"ר (שמות כא, כח) כי יגח אין נגיחה אלא בקרן שנאמר (מלכים א כב, יא) ויעש לו צדקיה בן כנענה קרני ברזל ויאמר כה אמר ה' באלה תנגח את ארם וגו' ואומר (דברים לג, יז) בכור שורו הדר לו וקרני ראם קרניו בהם עמים ינגח

contaminates both human beings and utensils,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. Lev. XI, 32-33. ');">⁴</span>

מאי ואומר וכי תימא דברי תורה מדברי קבלה לא ילפינן ת"ש בכור שורו הדר לו

while Resultants defile only foods and drinks,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. ibid. 34. ');">⁵</span>

והאי מילף הוא גילוי מילתא בעלמא הוא דנגיחה בקרן הוא

leaving human beings and utensils undefiled.

אלא מהו דתימא כי פליג רחמנא בין תם למועד ה"מ בתלושה אבל במחוברת אימא כולה מועדת היא

Here [in connection with damages] what is the [relationship in] law [between the principal and the secondary kinds]? — Said R. Papa: Some of the derivatives are on a par with their Principals whereas others are not.

ת"ש בכור שורו הדר לו וגו'

Our Rabbis taught: Three principal categories [of damage] have been identified in Scripture with Ox: The Horn, The Tooth, and The Foot. Where is the authority for 'Horn'? For our Rabbis taught: If it will gore.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XXI, 28. ');">⁶</span>

תולדה דקרן מאי היא נגיפה נשיכה רביצה ובעיטה

There is no 'goring' but with a horn, as it is said: And Zedekiah the son of Chenaanah made him horns of iron, and said, Thus saith the Lord, With these shalt thou gore the Arameans;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I Kings XXII, 11. ');">⁷</span>

מאי שנא נגיחה דקרי לה אב דכתיב כי יגח נגיפה נמי כתיב (שמות כא, לה) כי יגוף האי נגיפה נגיחה היא דתניא פתח בנגיפה וסיים בנגיחה לומר לך זו היא נגיפה זו היא נגיחה

and it is further said, His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of a unicorn: with them he shall gore the people together etc.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XXXIII, 17. ');">⁸</span>

מאי שנא גבי אדם דכתיב כי יגח ומאי שנא גבי בהמה דכתיב כי יגוף

Why that 'further' citation? — Because you might perhaps say that Pentateuchal teachings cannot be deduced from post-Pentateuchal texts;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [ [H] 'words of tradition'; i.e. the teachings received on tradition from the prophets, a designation for non-Pentateuchal, primarily prophetic, texts. V. Bacher, op. cit., I, 166, II, 185.] The meaning of Ex. XXI, 28, should therefore not he deduced from I Kings XXII, 11. ');">⁹</span>

אדם דאית ליה מזלא כתיב כי יגח בהמה דלית לה מזלא כתיב כי יגוף

come therefore and hear: His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of a unicorn etc.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XXXIII, 17. ');">⁸</span>

ומלתא אגב אורחיה קמ"ל דמועד לאדם הוי מועד לבהמה ומועד לבהמה לא הוי מועד לאדם

But is that a [matter of] deduction? Is it not rather merely an elucidation of the term 'goring'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which might surely he obtained even from post- Pentateuchal texts. ');">¹⁰</span>

נשיכה תולדה דשן היא לא שן יש הנאה להזיקה הא אין הנאה להזיקה

as being effected by a horn?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hence again why that 'further' citation? ');">¹¹</span>

רביצה ובעיטה תולדה דרגל היא לא רגל הזיקה מצוי הני אין הזיקן מצוי

— [Were it not for the 'further' citation] you might say that the distinction made by Scripture between [the goring of a] <i>Tam</i><span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'Innocuous,' i.e., an animal not having gored on more than three occasions; the payment for damage done on any of the first three incidents (of goring] is half of the total assessment and is realised out of the body of the animal that gored, cf. Ex. XXI, 35 and infra 16b. ');">¹²</span>

אלא תולדותיהן לאו כיוצא בהן דאמר רב פפא אהייא

and [that of a] <i>Mu'ad</i><span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'Cautioned,' i.e., after it had already gored three times, and its owner had been duly cautioned, the payment is for the whole damage and is realised out of the owner's general estate; v. Ex. XXI, 36, and infra 16b. ');">¹³</span>

אילימא אהני מאי שנא קרן דכוונתו להזיק וממונך ושמירתו עליך הני נמי כוונתן להזיק וממונך ושמירתן עליך

is confined to goring effected by a severed horn,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As was the case in the first quotation from Kings. ');">¹⁴</span>

אלא תולדה דקרן כקרן וכי קאמר רב פפא אשן ורגל

whereas in the case of a horn still naturally attached, all goring is [habitual and consequently treated as of a] <i>Mu'ad</i>; come therefore and hear: His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of a unicorn, etc.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XXXIII, 17. ');">⁸</span>

שן ורגל היכא כתיבי דתניא (שמות כב, ד) ושלח זה הרגל וכן הוא אומר (ישעיהו לב, כ) משלחי רגל השור והחמור

What are the derivatives of Horn? — Collision, Biting, [malicious] Falling and Kicking.

ובער זו השן וכן הוא אומר (מלכים א יד, י) כאשר יבער

Why this differentiation? If Goring is termed Principal because it is expressly written, If it will gore,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 2, n. 13. ');">¹⁵</span> why should this not apply to Collision, as it is also written, If it will collide?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XXI, 35. ');">¹⁶</span> — That collision denotes goring, as it was taught: The text opens with collision<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XXI, 35. ');">¹⁶</span> and concludes with goring<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. 36. ');">¹⁷</span> for the purpose of indicating that 'collision' here denotes 'goring'. Why the differentiation between injury to man, regarding which it is written <i>If it will gore</i>,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 2, n. 13. ');">¹⁸</span> and injury to animal regarding which it is written <i>if it will collide</i>?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 3; n. 10. ');">¹⁹</span> — Man who possesses foresight is, as a rule, injured [only] by means of [wilful] 'goring',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As it is more difficult to injure a man than an animal. ');">²⁰</span> but an animal, lacking foresight, is injured by mere 'collision'. A [new] point is incidentally made known to us, that [an animal] <i>Mu'ad</i> to injure man is considered <i>Mu'ad</i> in regard to animal,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. infra 205. ');">²¹</span> whereas <i>Mu'ad</i> to injure animal is not considered <i>Mu'ad</i> in regard to man.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As it is more difficult to injure a man than an animal. ');">²⁰</span> 'Biting': is not this a derivative of Tooth? — No; Tooth affords the animal gratification from the damage while Biting affords it no gratification from the damage. 'Falling and Kicking'; are not these derivatives of Foot? — No; the damage of foot occurs frequently while the damage of these does not occur frequently. But what then are the derivatives which, R. Papa says, are not on a par with their Principals? He can hardly be said to refer to these, since what differentiation is possible? For just as Horn does its damage with intent and, being your property, is under your control, so also these [derivatives] do damage with intent and, being your property, are under your control! The derivatives of Horn are therefore equal to Horn, and R. Papa's statement refers to Tooth and Foot. 'Tooth' and 'Foot'- where in Scripture are they set down? — It is taught: And he shall send forth<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XXII, 4. ');">²²</span> denotes Foot, as it is [elsewhere] expressed, That send forth the feet of the ox and the ass.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Isa. XXXII, 20. ');">²³</span> And it shall consume<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XXII, 4. ');">²²</span> denotes Tooth as [elsewhere] expressed, As the tooth consumeth