The mishna brings cases comparing situations where an animal and a man may do the same damage but one would be obligated to pay damages and the other would not. In the context of these cases, there is one of a man burning a field on Shabbat where a man would be exempt because when one is liable to death, he is exempt from monetary payment. This mishna raises a question to Rabbi Yochanan’s view that one who burns as a destructive act, has not desecrated Shabbat since the act is destructive. Two alternative readings of the mishna are brought to answer this question. If there is a debate between the two sides about did the animal cause the damage or not or whose animal caused the damage or did a larger animal or a smaller animal damaged or was it the smaller or the larger animal that he caused the damage to, we say that the burden of proof lies with the one trying to claim the money from the other. Rabbi Chiya bar Abba holds that Sumchus would disagree in these cases and say that the money is question is split between the two sides. the gemara then tries to assess whether the cases is where each is confident in his claim or one is confident and the other is not.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.