Bava Kamma 36: Surplus Value and the Meaning of Money

Today's daf begins in Perek III and ends in Perek IV.  The Gemara ends its conversation about oxen that are suspected of injuring another person's property.  We are reminded again of the importance of credibility: if there are no witnesses to the goring, there must be a strong case against one of the oxen - or both of the oxen - in question.  Without a credible statement of fact, the court is not lenient.

Perek IV begins with a new Mishna about particularly wild oxen.  If an ox gores other oxen one ofter the other, its owner is liable to pay damages from the sale of the carcass of that ox.  From that, half of the damages incurred are paid to the owner of the last ox gored.  If money is left over, half of that amount is paid to the second last ox gored.  And so on.  We also learn that one gold dinar is worth fifty silver dinars.

The Gemara wonders whose opinion is described in this Mishna.  Perhaps the entire thing is the opinion of one Sage, but that doesn't seem to be possible.  Perhaps one Sage wrote the first half and another Sage wrote the second half.  Based on those considerations, the Gemara asks what is being taught in this Mishna.  Some options:

• Ravina: if there is a surplus value (the last ox was injured less than the second last ox), it should be returned to the previously injured party
• Ravin says that Rabbi Yehoshua in Jerusalem said: this Mishna tells us about the negligence of bailees, for each owner was in possession of the ox and allowed it to move along and injure other oxen

The rabbis consider that gold dinar, worth fifty silver dinars. They teach us that in daf 90, we learn that one who slaps* another owes that person either 100 dinars or a sela.  This may cover the cost of humiliation alone.  On the other hand, it may include costs for pain, medical expenses, loss of wages, and humiliation as well.  Which sela are we speaking of, the rabbis wonder, a Tyrian sela worth four dinars or a provincial sela worth a half of one dinar (or one eighth of a Tyrian)?  If a gold dinar has to be split in half, this means that people would need the physical coins to make twelve and one half dinars.  A provincial dinar could not be used in this context, for it cannot be split into equal coins.

Our daf ends with the rabbis discussing the value of one half dinar.  Is it worth collecting?  For oneself? For the poor?  I am trying to imagine how this might translate today.  Was it a quarter? A dime?  A nickle?  Most people would agree that one dollar is certainly worth collecting, so it must have been worth less that one dollar.  The notion of coins, ascribing value to a physical symbol of 'worth' is a such a bizarre, abstract concept.  Especially when that object we call a coin is representing the acknowledgement of pain in another person.

*usually interpreted as a slap in the face, but could be one who yells in his ear, or claps his hands to humiliate another person as if threatening to slap