1) If two men are fighting and one of them strikes a pregnant woman and causes her to miscarry, he must pay the monetary damage caused by the loss of the fetuses to the woman’s husband (Rashi 21:22). Why does the Torah refer to the standard case as one in which the woman is pregnant with multiple children?
Rav Shimon Schwab (Mayan Beis HaShoeivah) suggests that the Torah is in fact teaching that when the Jewish people perform the mitzvos and reach the proper spiritual level, the typical scenario will indeed be one of multiple births.
R’ Zalman Sorotzkin in Oznayim L’Torah explains, that Parshas Mishpotim was given just three months after the Yidden left Mitzrayim, and at that point in time it was normal to have six babies in one go.
Ovi mori shlita showed me that R’ Chaim Kanievsky in Tama Dekra cites a peshat he heard from chocham eched. The Gemara says that the way we work out how much to pay for causing a woman to miscarry, is to see the difference in price between a woman who is pregnant and a woman who is not pregnant. When working out how much a pregnant woman is worth, one takes in to account that she may be carrying twins. Therefore, even if one causes a woman who is carrying just one baby to miscarry, when determining how much to pay, one has to pay the amount of two. See inside however, where R’ Chaim is not so happy with this peshat.
2) A yeshiva bochur asked another boy to wake him up at a specific time. On his way into the room, his friend accidentally walked on top of the glasses of the boy who was sleeping and broke them. Is he obligated to pay for them?
The Gemara in Bava Kama (27b) rules that if a person is walking in a public thoroughfare and accidentally breaks something that was placed there, he is exempt from paying for the damages because people are generally focused on other matters when they are walking and are unaccustomed to looking down to make sure that there is nothing in their path that could break. Based on this, Rav Meir Bransdorfer (Shu”t Knei Bosem 1:154) rules that by asking his friend to enter his room and wake him up, the sleeping bochur gave his friend permission to walk in the room, rendering it legally comparable to a public thoroughfare, in which case he had no responsibility to look where he was walking and is exempt for paying for the glasses. Rav Yaakov Blau (Pischei Choshen Dinei Nezikin 8:10) disagrees and maintains that even though he was given permission to enter the room, this does not transform the room into a public thoroughfare, and he is still obligated to examine where he is walking to prevent damage. Since he failed to do so, he must pay for the broken glasses.
3) The Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpot 378) rules, “Just like it is forbidden to steal and rob from another person, so too, it is forbidden to damage another person’s property”.
The Gemara in Bava Kamma (51) says, that if Reuven tells his friend to damage Shimon’s property, Reuven is obligated to pay because ein shliach lidvar aveirah, when it comes to aveiros there is no concept of shlichus. We see from the Shulchan Aruch and the Gemara that it’s forbidden to damage someone else’s property. The question is, what exactly is the source?
Don’t answer from the pasuk: מכה בהמה ישלמנה – “If one damages an animal he must pay”, as true if one causes his friend a loss he must pay, but where do we see that it’s forbidden to do so in the first place, perhaps one is allowed to cause damage, as long as he pays in the end?
The poskim cite various different sources, here are a few:
- There is a mitzvah to save another person’s property from getting damaged. If one sees that his friend’s field is about to get flooded, there is a mitzvah of hashovas aveidah to build a fence around the field to protect it. If one is obligated to prevent damage happening to his friend’s property, certainly, it is forbidden to actively go ahead and cause damage. (Reshash Kesubos 18b, Chelkas Yo’av 20, Kehillos Yaakov, Bava Kama 1)
- The Minchas Chinuch (Mitzvah 11 in Kometz Hamincha) writes, according to the above, one is allowed to cause damage to a non-Jew, as there is no mitzvah of hashovas aveidah by a non-Jew.
- Rabbeinu Yonah (beginning of Avos) learns that it is included in לא תגזל, the issur to steal. Damaging another’s property is equivalent to stealing.
- Some learn that it is included in ba’al tashchis. If one transgresses an issur de’O’raisa if he wastes his own things, certainly, it is forbidden to destroy and waste another person’s items. (Levush, Choshen Mishpot 375, Kehillos Yaakov, Bava Kama 1)
- Some learn that the source is the pasuk: דרכיה דרכי נועם וכל נתיבותיה שלום – “It’s ways are pleasant and peaceful”. (Rosh, Klal 105:10)
- Some learn the source is the pasuk: ואהבת לרעך כמוך – “You shall love your friend like yourself”. Just like one wouldn’t want someone else to cause him damage, similarly, it’s forbidden for one to cause damage to another. (Yad Remah, Bava Basra 26a; Chinuch, Mitzvah 243; Yam Shel Shlomah, Bava Kama 10:23; Imrei Binah, Choshen Mishpot, Hilchos Eidus 33)
- In Parshas Mishpotim we have the pasuk: ולא ישמרנו בעליו – “the owner didn’t guard it”, we see that the owner is obligated to guard his animals from damage. If one must guard his animals from causing damage, certainly, one isn’t allowed to cause damage himself. (R’ Chaim Brisker, cited in Birchas Shmuel, Bava Kama 2).
4) In this week’s parsha we have the mitzvah of aliyah l’regel. Rabbeinu Bechaye (23:15) warns that one must go up by foot. He cites the pasuk: מה יפו פעמיך בנעלים בת נדיב, which describes how beautiful the footsteps of Klal Yisroel are. The Meiri at the beginning of Chagigah, and the Piskei Teshuvah (205) cites the Maharatz Chiyos (7) who also learns based on the Gemara in Chagigah (3a) that one must be oleh regel by foot. The question therefore is, the Gemara in Pesochim (94a) says, based on a drosha, that if one is outside of Modiin and he could make it in time to bring the Korban Pesach by using horses he is not obligated to do so. From this Gemara it seems like one may be olah regel on horses, and one doesn’t need to come by foot, it’s just that he doesn’t need to?
The Madanay Asher answers, that the prohibition of being oleh regel with a horse is from Yerusholayim to the Beis HaMikdosh, however, to get to Yerusholayim one may use a horse. The above is very logical, as it doesn’t make sense that one is obligated to walk all the way.
Perhaps we can answer, that this is in fact why if the only way one can arrive is by horse, he is exempt. Since one isn’t allowed to use a horse, and this is the only way possible, he can no longer fulfill the mitzvah, therefore, he is exempt.
5) In this week’s parsha we have the pasuk: ששת ימים תעשה מעשיך וביום השביעי תשבת למען ינוח שורך וחמורך - “Six days you shall work, and on the seventh day you shall rest, in order that your oxen and donkeys rest” (23:12). It seems that the purpose of Shabbos is in order that oxen and donkeys get a rest, how does this make any sense?
R’ Yisroel Meir Druk shlita (in his new sefer Lehavas Aish) explains, the Torah wants that a Yid keeps Shabbos in a way that it is mashpia [has an effect] on his animals. The way to read the pasuk is as follows, וביום השביעי תשבת, on Shabbos one should rest, what type of resting? One which will be mashpia onto his שורך וחמורך, onto his animals. The more one is mechazek in Torah and mitzvos, the more his surroundings are affected. This is what the Torah wants from Shabbos, the Torah wants one to keep Shabbos in a way, that it has an effect on his animals, and they also rest.
My dear shvogger R’ Yitzchok Ballon shlita showed me that R’ Avigdor Miller asks the above, and he explains, that we see from the above pasuk an amazing thing. Hashem created the world and he looks after every single thing, not just humans, he looks after the animals as well. Just like humans need to rest, so do animals, therefore, Hashem ensured animals get a rest on Shabbos. We mentioned in Parsha Bo the Pnei Yehoshua that says that the makkos rested on Shabbos, this fits very well with the above.
Another shvogger of mine, R’ Akiva Ballon shlita suggested yet another peshat, al pi drush. Perhaps what the pasuk is saying, is, that even if in the week one follows his yetzer horah and feeds the animal instincts that he has, when it comes to Shabbos one has to ignore his yetzer horah, and have a day of complete ruchniyus. Shabbos needs to be a day when one puts his animal part of his guf [body] to rest.
