The Loop

Thursday, September 15, 2011

A בור ing question

I just came back from the kollel and am bothered by the following question. If anyone can help, i would appreciate it
It says in BABA KAMMA if one person dug a pit 10 tephachim deep, a second person added to it to 20 tephachim deep and then a third person came and dug it to 30 tephachim deep. Now an unlucky ox happens to fall into the pit- ALL 3 DIGGERS ARE OBLIGATED TO PAY DAMAGES. Why- I understand the 1 st guy is responsible- he dug a dangerous pit in a public domain, the 3 rd guy could be responsible because the ox hit the bottom of the pit where the actual damage occurred. Why is the middle guy responsible ?? Isnt it like a person falling off a building and just before he hits the ground, someone shoots him. He isnt guilty- he killed a dead person. The second guy didnt cause any damage // Sometimes the things that bother me are ODD.
DAD

9 Comments:

  • Ephraim:
    the second dude made the pit an extra 10 tphachim making it more dangerous for the ox. If he had not dug the 10 tphachim, the third guy would not have made the pit 30 tphachim deep.

    By Blogger Veev, at 5:15 AM  

  • That is an EXCELLENT INSIGHT--
    My problem with Ephraim's answer is that the gemera teaches that once the pit is 10 deep,it is a lethal pit and can kill an animal which falls in, so a 20 or 30 tephachim deep pit is no more lethal than a 10 deep pit AND THEREFORE, What additional damage did the second DUDE do?

    By Blogger dad, at 7:57 AM  

  • Just because 10 CAN kill doesn't mean it will, presumably the added depth increases the probability

    By Blogger Shlomo, at 8:53 AM  

  • wow ephraim said dude

    By Blogger docyaak, at 9:09 AM  

  • I JUST SPOKE WITH CHAIM SILVERSTEIN WHO I OFTEN ASK MY QUESTIONS TO AND HE SAID VERY SIMILAR TO SHLOMO. THIS COULD BE THE CORRECT ANSWER UNLESS YOU UNDERSTAND THE GEMERA AS SAYING THAT A 10 DEEP PIT WILL DEFINITLY KILL THE OX DUE TO THE "FOUL AIR"
    IN WHICH CASE MY QUESTION RETURNS

    By Blogger dad, at 5:26 PM  

  • maybe because the 2nd person did not fix the problem, but encouraged the problem, he is equally responsible. i believe it's similar to the driver in a get-away car is liable the same as the the crime committer

    By Blogger 2R, at 1:48 PM  

  • Sarra's answer is comming from a whole different perspective and I really like it. I give you my "I like it Award"
    the DAD

    By Blogger dad, at 4:05 PM  

  • the second person didn't encourage the problem. He didn't make it any worse then it was before. still its true he didn't fix the problem.

    By Blogger Small Fry, at 8:53 AM  

  • the second person didn't encourage the problem. He didn't make it any worse then it was before. still its true he didn't fix the problem.

    By Blogger Small Fry, at 8:53 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home