‫הלכות נזקי ממון‬

‫פרק שני‬
Siman: ‫יוציא דופן‬

Context:

This Perek explains the irregular cases of ‫ קרן‬and ‫ רגל‬that are exceptions to the ‫כללים‬
explained in the first Perek. He puts the irregular cases of ‫ רגל‬and ‫ קרן‬together because
they both pay ‫חצי נזק‬.

‫פסוקים‬: None

Concepts:

1. ‫ד‬-‫ א‬:'‫(צרורות (ב‬

The term ‫ צרורות‬literally means pebbles. The classic case of ‫ צרורות‬is damages
caused by pebbles that were thrown by an animal’s walking.

Although the animal did not directly cause the damages through his body, the
animal’s owner is still obligated to pay for the damages since his animal generated
them.

The concept of ‫ צרורות‬applies to damages that are generated by both walking (‫(רגל‬
and eating (‫(שן‬.

2. The ‫ דין‬of ‫ב‬:‫(צרורות (ב‬

‫ צרורות‬is treated exactly like either ‫ שן‬or ‫רגל‬, and therefore, an animal that damages
through ‫צרורות‬, is ‫ פטור‬in a ‫רשות הרבים‬. However, there is one aspect which is
different and that is that the owner only pays ‫חצי נזק‬. This law is a ‫הלכה למשה מסיני‬.

3. ‫ו‬-‫ ה‬:‫(שינוי בצרורות (ב‬

Whether or not ‫ קרן‬applies to an action that is defined as ‫צרורות‬, is disputed in the
Gemara and left unresolved. (Baba Kama 19( The ‫ דין‬of ‫ צרורות‬halves the usual
payment of ‫ נזק שלם‬for an action categorized as ‫ שן‬or ‫רגל‬. The Gemara, Baba Kama
19, discusses whether or not the ‫ דין‬of ‫קרן‬, which in and of itself halves the payment,
applies to ‫ צרורות‬or not. One opinion is that it does (‫(יש שינוי בצרורות‬, and therefore,
‫ צרורות‬of ‫ קרן‬pays ¼ of the ‫נזק‬. The second opinion is that ‫ קרן‬does not apply to
‫(צרורות (אין שינוי בצרורות‬, and therefore, ‫ צרורות‬of ‫ קרן‬pays half.

4. ‫ ממון‬vs ‫ח‬-‫ ז‬:‫(קנס (ב‬

Any time a ‫ מזיק‬is obligated to pay ‫נזק שלם‬, we call that payment ‫ממון‬, and we
consider it similar to a debt that someone has to a creditor. Any time the ‫ מזיק‬pays
either half the damages (‫ (קרן‬or more than the damages (‫(כפל‬, we call that payment
a ‫( קנס‬penalty(.
 One fundamental difference between owing ‫ ממון‬or owing a ‫ קנס‬is ‫כל המודה בקנס פטור‬.
This principle is learned from the Possuk, Exodus 22:8, ‫אשר ירשיען אלוקים ישלם שנים‬
‫לרעהו‬. (But if he admits to the crime, he does not pay twice the amount damaged.(
There are two types of ‫מודה בקנס‬. The first is when the ‫ הודעה‬obligates him in another
payment, as in ‫גניבה‬. And the second is when it exempts him from all payments. In
the first case (‫(גניבה‬, the ‫ מודה בקנס‬is ‫ פטור‬forever. In the second case, the ‫מודה בקנס‬
is only ‫ פטור‬until ‫ עדים‬testify that his ‫ תם‬animal damaged.

5. ‫ טו‬:'‫(בתחילתו פשיעה וסופו אונס ח"ב (ב‬

If the owner’s negligence made it possible for his animal to now be in a position to
cause damages, we hold the owner accountable, even if his animal subsequently
damaged through an act that would be considered ‫אונס‬. Since it was the owner’s
negligence that made the damages possible, he is liable to pay. This rule only
applies if the negligence leads to the damages. If the negligence is totally
disconnected from the damages, then this rule does not apply. One example is the
case of a ‫ שור‬that dies in a swamp, because of the ‫ מלאך המוות‬and not the poisonous
air.

6. ‫יט‬:‫(שכל המשנה ובא אחר ושנה פטור (ב‬

For example, if someone incites a dog to bite, and he incites the dog to bite himself
(that’s a double ‫(שינוי‬, the dog’s owner is not obligated to pay for the damages his
animal caused.