Study Bava Kamma folio 36A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
ראוי ליטול, ואין לו. והתניא: הרי זה משתלם לקטן מן המועד, ולגדול מן התם! דתפס.
The Talmud answers: The Mishnah does not indicate that the injured party receives compensation. Rather, it indicates that it is fitting for him to take compensation, but in practice he does not receive any compensation. The Talmud asks: But isn’t it taught in a baraita that he receives payment for his small ox from the liable party’s forewarned ox, and for his large ox from the liable party’s innocuous ox? Evidently he does receive payment. The Talmud answers: This baraita is also referring to a case where the injured party seized the defendant’s ox, in which case the court allows it to remain in his possession. The court cannot compel the defendant to pay him ab initio.
היו שניהם של איש אחד – שניהם חייבים. אמר ליה רבא מפרזיקא לרב אשי: שמע מינה, שוורים תמים שהזיקו – רצה מזה גובה, רצה מזה גובה.
§ The Mishnah teaches: In a case where an ox was injured by one of two oxen that were pursuing it, if both oxen belonged to one person, both are liable. Rava of Parzika said to Rav Ashi: Should one learn from the fact that both are liable that in a case of innocuous oxen that caused damage, if the injured party wishes, he can collect damages from the proceeds from the sale of this ox, and if he wishes, he can collect from the sale of that ox?
הכא במאי עסקינן – במועדין.
Rav Ashi rejected this inference: With what are we dealing here? We are dealing with forewarned oxen, in which case the injured party does not collect damages exclusively from the belligerent ox but rather from any of its owner’s property. Therefore, he can collect from either ox as compensation.