Welcome to the Judaism community on Codidact!
Will you help us build our community of learners? Drop into our study hall, ask questions, help others with answers to their questions, share a d'var torah if you're so inclined, invite your friends, and join us in building this community together. Not an ask-the-rabbi service, just people at all levels learning together.
Post History
Shulchan Aruch Choshen Mishpat 395:1 discusses this, quoting the gemara in Bava Kama 24b: המשסה כלבו של חבירו בחבירו פטור מדיני אדם וחייב בדיני שמים ובעל הכלב חייב חצי נזק שכיון שהוא יודע שאם שס...
Answer
#5: Post edited
by
Yehuda
·
2021-05-16T19:52:22Z (almost 3 years ago)
- Shulchan Aruch Choshen Mishpat 395:1 discusses this, quoting the gemara in Bava Kama 24b:
- > המשסה כלבו של חבירו בחבירו פטור מדיני אדם וחייב בדיני שמים ובעל הכלב חייב חצי נזק שכיון שהוא יודע שאם שסה את כלבו להזיק נושך לא היה לו להניחו ואם שסהו בעצמו בעל הכלב פטור שכל המשנה ובא אחר ושינה בו פטור
- >
> One who incites his fellow's dog onto his [other] fellow is exempt from the Law of Men but is liable by the Law of Heaven. The owner of the dog is liable to pay half-damages, since, because he know that if his dog is incited to damage it will bite, he was not allowed to leave it [unattended]. And if [the one who is bitten] incited [the dog] himself, the owner of the dog is exempt, because [of the principle of] one who deviates, if another deviates, [the damager] is exempt.- The principle of Kol Hameshaneh (_one who deviates_) declares that, because the inciter came along and caused the dog to act differently, the owner is not responsible for damaged caused to the inciter.
- Shulchan Aruch Choshen Mishpat 395:1 discusses this, quoting the gemara in Bava Kama 24b:
- > המשסה כלבו של חבירו בחבירו פטור מדיני אדם וחייב בדיני שמים ובעל הכלב חייב חצי נזק שכיון שהוא יודע שאם שסה את כלבו להזיק נושך לא היה לו להניחו ואם שסהו בעצמו בעל הכלב פטור שכל המשנה ובא אחר ושינה בו פטור
- >
- > One who incites his fellow's dog onto his [other] fellow is exempt from the Law of Men but is liable by the Law of Heaven. The owner of the dog is liable to pay half-damages, since, because he know that if his dog is incited to damage it will bite, he was not allowed to leave it [unattended]. And if [the one who is bitten] incited [the dog] himself, the owner of the dog is exempt, because [of the principle of] _one who deviates, if another deviates, [the damager] is exempt._
- The principle of Kol Hameshaneh (_one who deviates_) declares that, because the inciter came along and caused the dog to act differently, the owner is not responsible for damaged caused to the inciter.
#4: Post edited
by
Yehuda
·
2021-05-16T19:51:27Z (almost 3 years ago)
- Shulchan Aruch Choshen Mishpat 395:1 discusses this, quoting the gemara in Bava Kama 24b:
- > המשסה כלבו של חבירו בחבירו פטור מדיני אדם וחייב בדיני שמים ובעל הכלב חייב חצי נזק שכיון שהוא יודע שאם שסה את כלבו להזיק נושך לא היה לו להניחו ואם שסהו בעצמו בעל הכלב פטור שכל המשנה ובא אחר ושינה בו פטור
- >
> One who incites his fellow's dog onto his [other] fellow is exempt by the Law of Men but is liable by the Law of Heaven. The owner of the dog is liable to pay half-damages, since, because he know that if his dog is incited to damage it will bite, he was not allowed to leave it [unattended]. And if [the one who is bitten] incited [the dog] himself, the owner of the dog is exempt, because [of the principle of] one who deviates, if another deviates, [the damager] is exempt.- The principle of Kol Hameshaneh (_one who deviates_) declares that, because the inciter came along and caused the dog to act differently, the owner is not responsible for damaged caused to the inciter.
- Shulchan Aruch Choshen Mishpat 395:1 discusses this, quoting the gemara in Bava Kama 24b:
- > המשסה כלבו של חבירו בחבירו פטור מדיני אדם וחייב בדיני שמים ובעל הכלב חייב חצי נזק שכיון שהוא יודע שאם שסה את כלבו להזיק נושך לא היה לו להניחו ואם שסהו בעצמו בעל הכלב פטור שכל המשנה ובא אחר ושינה בו פטור
- >
- > One who incites his fellow's dog onto his [other] fellow is exempt from the Law of Men but is liable by the Law of Heaven. The owner of the dog is liable to pay half-damages, since, because he know that if his dog is incited to damage it will bite, he was not allowed to leave it [unattended]. And if [the one who is bitten] incited [the dog] himself, the owner of the dog is exempt, because [of the principle of] one who deviates, if another deviates, [the damager] is exempt.
- The principle of Kol Hameshaneh (_one who deviates_) declares that, because the inciter came along and caused the dog to act differently, the owner is not responsible for damaged caused to the inciter.
#3: Post edited
by
Yehuda
·
2021-05-16T19:49:01Z (almost 3 years ago)
- Shulchan Aruch Choshen Mishpat 395:1 discusses this, quoting the gemara in Bava Kama 24b:
- > המשסה כלבו של חבירו בחבירו פטור מדיני אדם וחייב בדיני שמים ובעל הכלב חייב חצי נזק שכיון שהוא יודע שאם שסה את כלבו להזיק נושך לא היה לו להניחו ואם שסהו בעצמו בעל הכלב פטור שכל המשנה ובא אחר ושינה בו פטור
- >
> One who incites his fellow's dog onto his [other] fellow is exempt by the Law of Men but is liable by the Law of Heaven. The owner of the dog is liable to pay half-damages, since, because he know that if his dog is incited to damage it will bite, he was not allowed to leave it [unattended]. And if [the one who is bitten] incited [the dog] himself, the owner of the dog is exempt, because one who deviates, if another deviates, [the damager] is exempt.- The principle of Kol Hameshaneh (_one who deviates_) declares that, because the inciter came along and caused the dog to act differently, the owner is not responsible for damaged caused to the inciter.
- Shulchan Aruch Choshen Mishpat 395:1 discusses this, quoting the gemara in Bava Kama 24b:
- > המשסה כלבו של חבירו בחבירו פטור מדיני אדם וחייב בדיני שמים ובעל הכלב חייב חצי נזק שכיון שהוא יודע שאם שסה את כלבו להזיק נושך לא היה לו להניחו ואם שסהו בעצמו בעל הכלב פטור שכל המשנה ובא אחר ושינה בו פטור
- >
- > One who incites his fellow's dog onto his [other] fellow is exempt by the Law of Men but is liable by the Law of Heaven. The owner of the dog is liable to pay half-damages, since, because he know that if his dog is incited to damage it will bite, he was not allowed to leave it [unattended]. And if [the one who is bitten] incited [the dog] himself, the owner of the dog is exempt, because [of the principle of] one who deviates, if another deviates, [the damager] is exempt.
- The principle of Kol Hameshaneh (_one who deviates_) declares that, because the inciter came along and caused the dog to act differently, the owner is not responsible for damaged caused to the inciter.
#2: Post edited
by
Yehuda
·
2021-05-16T19:48:19Z (almost 3 years ago)
- Shulchan Aruch Choshen Mishpat 395:1 discusses this, quoting the gemara in Bava Kama 24b:
- > המשסה כלבו של חבירו בחבירו פטור מדיני אדם וחייב בדיני שמים ובעל הכלב חייב חצי נזק שכיון שהוא יודע שאם שסה את כלבו להזיק נושך לא היה לו להניחו ואם שסהו בעצמו בעל הכלב פטור שכל המשנה ובא אחר ושינה בו פטור
- >
> One who incites his fellow's dog onto his [other] fellow is exempt by the Law of Men but is liable by the Law of Heaven. The owner of the dog is liable to pay half-damages, since, because he know that if his dog is incited to damage it will bite, he was not allowed to leave it. And if [the one who is bitten] incited [the dog] himself, the owner of the dog is exempt, because one who deviates, if another deviates, [the damager] is exempt.- The principle of Kol Hameshaneh (_one who deviates_) declares that, because the inciter came along and caused the dog to act differently, the owner is not responsible for damaged caused to the inciter.
- Shulchan Aruch Choshen Mishpat 395:1 discusses this, quoting the gemara in Bava Kama 24b:
- > המשסה כלבו של חבירו בחבירו פטור מדיני אדם וחייב בדיני שמים ובעל הכלב חייב חצי נזק שכיון שהוא יודע שאם שסה את כלבו להזיק נושך לא היה לו להניחו ואם שסהו בעצמו בעל הכלב פטור שכל המשנה ובא אחר ושינה בו פטור
- >
- > One who incites his fellow's dog onto his [other] fellow is exempt by the Law of Men but is liable by the Law of Heaven. The owner of the dog is liable to pay half-damages, since, because he know that if his dog is incited to damage it will bite, he was not allowed to leave it [unattended]. And if [the one who is bitten] incited [the dog] himself, the owner of the dog is exempt, because one who deviates, if another deviates, [the damager] is exempt.
- The principle of Kol Hameshaneh (_one who deviates_) declares that, because the inciter came along and caused the dog to act differently, the owner is not responsible for damaged caused to the inciter.
#1: Initial revision
by
Yehuda
·
2021-05-16T19:46:15Z (almost 3 years ago)
Shulchan Aruch Choshen Mishpat 395:1 discusses this, quoting the gemara in Bava Kama 24b: > המשסה כלבו של חבירו בחבירו פטור מדיני אדם וחייב בדיני שמים ובעל הכלב חייב חצי נזק שכיון שהוא יודע שאם שסה את כלבו להזיק נושך לא היה לו להניחו ואם שסהו בעצמו בעל הכלב פטור שכל המשנה ובא אחר ושינה בו פטור > > One who incites his fellow's dog onto his [other] fellow is exempt by the Law of Men but is liable by the Law of Heaven. The owner of the dog is liable to pay half-damages, since, because he know that if his dog is incited to damage it will bite, he was not allowed to leave it. And if [the one who is bitten] incited [the dog] himself, the owner of the dog is exempt, because one who deviates, if another deviates, [the damager] is exempt. The principle of Kol Hameshaneh (_one who deviates_) declares that, because the inciter came along and caused the dog to act differently, the owner is not responsible for damaged caused to the inciter.