Bava Kamma 4: Are there More Primary Categories?

The rabbis clarify the distinctions between different primary categories of damages.  What seems most clear at the beginning of today's daf is that Eating is different from Goring in that an animal intends to derive pleasure from eating, while an animal does not intend to derive pleasure from goring.  Similarly, Trampling is a primary category where there is no intent to derive pleasure from the damages caused.

We learn that slaves and maidservants are considered to be independent regarding damages.  This means that if a slave causes damage to another master's property, the slave and not his master is obligated to repay those damages.  Although a master could have instructed his slave to damage another's property, the Gemara argues that a slave could also cause great damage with the intent to bankrupt his master.  The rabbis decide that slaves and maidservants are in fact independent and have the ability to choose whether or not to damage another's property.  This happens to be a convenient argument for the rabbis, as none of them were also slaves but likely many of them were masters.

The Gemara teaches that the primary category of ox is distinct from the primary category of Man, which is new category for us.  If an ox kills another ox after the owner has been warned about goring, the owner is liable to pay damages called a ransom.  The ransom is money paid to release the owner from the penalty of death at the hand of Heaven.  In addition, the ox is stoned.  If a man kills another man, there are four additional forms of payment: pain, humiliation, medical costs, and loss of livelihood.  This is added to the payment for damages.

The rabbis discuss whether it is the typical manner of an ox to gore; for a man to damage property.  If so, we should always be safeguarding our bodies so that they do not cause damage.

The rabbis argue about the origin of the primary category of Maveh.  Perhaps it is related to the word for 'fire', as proof texts might suggest.  But there is no living spirit in fire as there is in Maveh.

Rabbi Oshaya suggests that there are not four but thirteen primary sources of damages.  In addition to the four already mentioned (Ox, Pit, Maveh, Fire), there are the "Bailees": the Unpaid Bailee, the Borrower, the Paid Bailee, the Renter; and the Indemnities: Damage (loss in value because of damages), Pain, Medical Costs, Loss of Livelihood, and Humiliation. 

The rabbis argue about whether there are thirteen primary sources of damage, or perhaps nine primary sources of damage, or whether Rabbi Oshaya's categories are sub-categories of the primary category of Man.  Or, they argue, is the distinction about action in contrast with damages that occur on their own?  Perhaps there are twenty-four primary sources of damage.  We learn about thieves, rapists, seducers, defamers, those who cause teruma to be ritually impure, those who mix teruma with non-sacred food, one who pours wine for idolatry? 

When asked why these candidates were not considered further as possible primary sources of damage, we are told to consider their punishments.  For example, when fines are the consequence of one's action, perhaps the action should not be considered a primary source. 

What began relatively simply has become incredibly complex.  If I were to create a chart that defines each crime with its punishment, I might be able to better understand the complicated narrative that we are following.  Not today... we'll see about tomorrow.