## Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma Chapter 2

###### Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:1:1
[Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:1:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bartenura%20on%20Mishnah%20Bava%20Kamma/r/2:1:1)

**כֵּיצַד הָרֶגֶל מוּעֶדֶת.** כְּלוֹמַר, בְּאֵיזֶה דָּבָר הָרֶגֶל מוּעֶדֶת. וּמְשָׁנֵי, לְשַׁבֵּר בְּדֶרֶךְ הִלּוּכָהּ. בְּכָךְ הִיא מוּעֶדֶת, שֶׁמְּשַׁבֶּרֶת כֵּלִים דֶּרֶךְ הִלּוּכָהּ:

**Bartenura on Mishnah, trans. by Rabbi Robert Alpert, 2020:**
כיצד הרגל מועדת – meaning to say, in which manner does the foot become forewarned? And it answers to break something while it is walking. As such it is forewarned when it smashes utensils while it is walking.


###### Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:1:2
[Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:1:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bartenura%20on%20Mishnah%20Bava%20Kamma/r/2:1:2)

**הַבְּהֵמָה מוּעֶדֶת.** רֵישָׁא תָּנָא אָבוֹת, רֶגֶל מַמָּשׁ, שֶׁדָּרְסָה בְּרַגְלֶיהָ. וְסֵיפָא תָּנָא תּוֹלָדוֹת, שֶׁבְּהֵמָה מוּעֶדֶת לְהַלֵּךְ כְּדַרְכָּהּ וּלְשַׁבֵּר בְּגוּפָהּ וּבִשְׂעָרָהּ וּבַשְּׁלִיף שֶׁעָלֶיהָ דֶּרֶךְ הִלּוּכָהּ:

**Bartenura on Mishnah, trans. by Rabbi Robert Alpert, 2020:**
הבהמה מועדת – the first part [of the Mishnah] teaches chief actionable damages of the “foot” that she treaded on with her feet, and the concluding part [of the Mishnah] teaches derivates that the animal is forewarned to walk in her manner and to bread with her body and with her hair and the sliding pouch that is upon her while she is walking.


###### Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:1:3
[Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:1:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bartenura%20on%20Mishnah%20Bava%20Kamma/r/2:1:3)

**הָיְתָה מְבַעֶטֶת.** שִׁנּוּי הוּא זֶה, וְתוֹלָדָה דְּקֶרֶן, הִלְכָּךְ חֲצִי נֶזֶק וְתוּ לֹא:


###### Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:1:4
[Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:1:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bartenura%20on%20Mishnah%20Bava%20Kamma/r/2:1:4)

**אוֹ שֶׁהָיוּ צְרוֹרוֹת מְנַתְּזִין.** אַף עַל גַּב דְּלָאו שִׁנּוּי הוּא אֶלָּא אוֹרְחֵיהּ הוּא, אַף עַל פִּי כֵן חֲצִי נֶזֶק וְתוּ לֹא, דְּהִלְכָתָא גְּמִירָא לַהּ. וּבִרְשׁוּת הַנִּזָּק קָאָמַר, דְּבִרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים פָּטוּר, דִּצְרוֹרוֹת תּוֹלָדָה דְּרֶגֶל נִינְהוּ לְפָטְרָם בִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים:

**Bartenura on Mishnah, trans. by Rabbi Robert Alpert, 2020:**
או שהיו צרורות מנתזין – even though it is not a change, but rather, the way things happen, nevertheless, half-damages and not more, for this is the normative Halakha for this and we are speaking about the domain of the person who suffered the damages, but in the public domain, he is exempt [from damages] for pebbles are a derivative of the “foot” to make them exempt in the public domain.


###### Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:1:5
[Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:1:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bartenura%20on%20Mishnah%20Bava%20Kamma/r/2:1:5)

**וְנָפַל עַל כְּלִי אַחֵר.** רִאשׁוֹן נִזְקֵי רֶגֶל הֵן וּמְשַׁלֶּמֶת נֶזֶק שָׁלֵם. וְהָאַחֲרוֹן עַל יְדֵי צְרוֹרוֹת נִשְׁבַּר, הִלְכָּךְ חֲצִי נֶזֶק:

**Bartenura on Mishnah, trans. by Rabbi Robert Alpert, 2020:**
ונפל על כלי אחר – these are the first damages of the “foot” and she (i.e., its owner) pays full damages and the latter are through broken pebbles, therefore, half-damage.


###### Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:1:6
[Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:1:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bartenura%20on%20Mishnah%20Bava%20Kamma/r/2:1:6)

**דְּלִיל קָשׁוּר בְּרַגְלוֹ.** כָּל דָּבָר הַנִּקְשָׁר בְּרֶגֶל הַתַּרְנְגֹלֶת קָרוּי דְּלִיל. וְאִית דְּגָרְסֵי דְּלִי:

**Bartenura on Mishnah, trans. by Rabbi Robert Alpert, 2020:**
דליל קשור ברגלו – everything that is attacked onto the foot of the chicken is called is דליל/anything irregularly wound/entangled, and there are those who have the reading דלי/bucket.


###### Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:1:7
[Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:1:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bartenura%20on%20Mishnah%20Bava%20Kamma/r/2:1:7)

**מְהַדֵּס.** מְרַקֵּד. וְאִית דִּמְפָרְשֵׁי חוֹפֵר בְּרַגְלָיו בָּאָרֶץ, כְּדֶרֶךְ הַתַּרְנְגוֹלִים:

**Bartenura on Mishnah, trans. by Rabbi Robert Alpert, 2020:**
מהדס – (scratch) to dance, and there are those who interpret it as digging with its feet in the earth in the manner of chickens.


###### Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:1:8
[Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:1:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bartenura%20on%20Mishnah%20Bava%20Kamma/r/2:1:8)

**מְשַׁלֵּם חֲצִי נֶזֶק.** דִּדְלִיל הַיְנוּ צְרוֹרוֹת, דִּבְאוֹתוֹ דְּלִיל אַדְּיִנְהוּ לַצְּרוֹרוֹת עַל הַכֵּלִים. וְהִדּוּס נַמִּי כְּגוֹן שֶׁהִתִּיז וְאוֹתָן צְרוֹרוֹת שָׁבְרוּ הַכֵּלִים:

**Bartenura on Mishnah, trans. by Rabbi Robert Alpert, 2020:**
משלם חצי נזק – that is entangled/irregularly wound that is pebbles are judged as pebbles on the utensils, and incisions/scratches also, such as that pebbles that were tossed and they broke the utensils.


###### Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:2:1
[Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:2:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bartenura%20on%20Mishnah%20Bava%20Kamma/r/2:2:1)

**כֵּיצַד הַשֵּׁן מוּעֶדֶת.** בְּאֵיזֶה דָּבָר הִיא מוּעֶדֶת. וּמְשָׁנֵי, לֶאֱכֹל אֶת הָרָאוּי לָהּ:

**Bartenura on Mishnah, trans. by Rabbi Robert Alpert, 2020:**
כיצד השן מועדת – in what manner is it “forewarned?” And it answers: to eat what is is appropriate for it.


###### Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:2:2
[Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:2:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bartenura%20on%20Mishnah%20Bava%20Kamma/r/2:2:2)

**מְשַׁלֵּם חֲצִי נֶזֶק.** דִּמְשֻׁנֶּה הוּא:

**Bartenura on Mishnah, trans. by Rabbi Robert Alpert, 2020:**
משלם חצי נזק – for it is unusual (to eat clothing or chew up utensils).


###### Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:2:3
[Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:2:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bartenura%20on%20Mishnah%20Bava%20Kamma/r/2:2:3)

**בַּמֶּה דְבָרִים אֲמוּרִים וְכוּ'.** אַאָכְלָה פֵּרוֹת אוֹ יְרָקוֹת קָאֵי, דְּבִרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים פָּטוּר דְּבָעִינַן וּבִעֵר בִּשְׂדֵה אַחֵר. אֲבָל אָכְלָה כְּסוּת וְכֵלִים אֲפִלּוּ בִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים חַיָּב חֲצִי נֶזֶק, דְּעָבְדֵי אִנְשֵׁי דְּמַנְחֵי כְּסוּת וְכֵלִים בִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים לְפִי שָׁעָה, וְהָוֵי קֶרֶן בִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים וְחַיָּב:

**Bartenura on Mishnah, trans. by Rabbi Robert Alpert, 2020:**
בד"א וכו' - it refers to when it eats fruits or vegetables that are in the public domain, it is exempt, for we require (Exodus 22:4): “When a man lets his livestock loose to graze in another’s land,” but if it ate clothing or utensils, even in the public domain it is liable one-half damages, for people generally put clothing and utensils in the public domain according to the hour and it is the “horn” in the domain of the person suffering damages and he is liable.


###### Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:2:4
[Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:2:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bartenura%20on%20Mishnah%20Bava%20Kamma/r/2:2:4)

**מְשַׁלֵּם מַה שֶּׁנֶּהֱנֵית.** לָאו תַּשְׁלוּמִין מְעַלְּיָתָא, אֶלָּא אִם אָכְלָה דָּבָר שֶׁדָּמָיו יְקָרִים רוֹאִים אוֹתוֹ כְּאִלּוּ הֵן שְׂעֹרִים, וְאֵינוֹ מְשַׁלֵּם אֶלָּא דְּמֵי שְׂעֹרִים בְּזוֹל, שֶׁהוּא שְׁלִישׁ פָּחוֹת מִמַּה שֶּׁהֵם נִמְכָּרִים בַּשּׁוּק. וְאִם אָכְלָה דָּבָר שֶׁדָּמָיו פְּחוּתִים מִן הַשְּׂעֹרִים, מְשַׁלֵּם דְּמֵי אוֹתוֹ דָּבָר שֶׁאָכְלָה בְּזוֹל. וְאִם אָכְלָה דָּבָר שֶׁהִזִּיק לָהּ, כְּגוֹן שֶׁאָכְלָה חִטִּים, הוֹאִיל וְלֹא נֶהֱנֵית, פָּטוּר:

**Bartenura on Mishnah, trans. by Rabbi Robert Alpert, 2020:**
משלם מה שנהנית – these are not valid payments but rather if it ate something that its value was great, we view it as if they barley, and he doesn’t pay anything other than the value of the barley at its cheapest, which is a full third less than what they are sold for in the marketplace. But, if it ate something whose worth is less than the barley, he pays the worthy of that thing that it ate at its cheapest, and if it (i.e., the animal) ate that which he damaged such as that it ate the wheat but since it did not benefit, it [the owner] is exempt [from payment].


###### Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:2:5
[Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:2:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bartenura%20on%20Mishnah%20Bava%20Kamma/r/2:2:5)

**מִצִּדֵּי הָרְחָבָה מְשַׁלֵּם מַה שֶּׁהִזִּיקָה.** אִם הָלְכָה וְעָמְדָה בְּצִדֵּי הַרְחָבָה בְּמָקוֹם שֶׁאֵין דֶּרֶךְ שְׁוָרִים לָלֶכֶת שָׁם, לָאו כִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים דָּמֵי, וּמְשַׁלֶּמֶת מַה שֶּׁהִזִּיקָה:

**Bartenura on Mishnah, trans. by Rabbi Robert Alpert, 2020:**
מצדד הרחבה משלם מה שהזיקה – if it (i.e., the animal) stood and at the sides of the road in a place where it is not the manner of bulls to walk there, it is not compared to the public domain, and it pays what it damages.


###### Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:3:1
[Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:3:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bartenura%20on%20Mishnah%20Bava%20Kamma/r/2:3:1)

**מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן מוּעָדִין.** לִקְפֹּץ. וּבִרְשׁוּת הַנִּזָּק קָאָמַר, דְּתוֹלָדָה דְּרֶגֶל הִיא:

**Bartenura on Mishnah, trans. by Rabbi Robert Alpert, 2020:**
מפני שהן מועדין – to jump, and we are speaking of in the domain of the one who suffered damages, for it is a derivative of the “foot.”


###### Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:3:2
[Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:3:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bartenura%20on%20Mishnah%20Bava%20Kamma/r/2:3:2)

**חֲרָרָה.** עוּגָה שֶׁנֶּאֱפֵית עַל גַּבֵּי גֶּחָלִים:


###### Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:3:3
[Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:3:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bartenura%20on%20Mishnah%20Bava%20Kamma/r/2:3:3)

**עַל הַחֲרָרָה מְשַׁלֵּם נֶזֶק שָׁלֵם.** דַּהֲוֵי שֵׁן בִּרְשׁוּת הַנִּזָּק:

**Bartenura on Mishnah, trans. by Rabbi Robert Alpert, 2020:**
על החררה משלם נזק שלם – for this is the “tooth” in the domain of the one who suffered damages.


###### Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:3:4
[Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:3:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bartenura%20on%20Mishnah%20Bava%20Kamma/r/2:3:4)

**וְעַל הַגָּדִישׁ מְשַׁלֵּם חֲצִי נֶזֶק.** דַּהֲוֵי כְּמוֹ צְרוֹרוֹת, דְּהִלְכָתָא גְּמִירֵי לַהּ שֶׁמְּשַׁלֵּם חֲצִי נֶזֶק:

**Bartenura on Mishnah, trans. by Rabbi Robert Alpert, 2020:**
ועל הגדיש משלם חצי נזק – they are like pebbles, and the decided Halakha is that he should pay one-half damages.


###### Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:4:1
[Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:4:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bartenura%20on%20Mishnah%20Bava%20Kamma/r/2:4:1)

**מִשֶּׁיַּחֲזֹר בּוֹ שְׁלֹשָׁה יָמִים.** שֶׁרוֹאֶה שְׁוָרִים וְאֵינוֹ נוֹגֵחַ, חוֹזֵר לְתַמּוּתוֹ:

**Bartenura on Mishnah, trans. by Rabbi Robert Alpert, 2020:**
משיחזור בו שלשה ימים – when he sees bulls and they are not goring, they return to the innocuous state.


###### Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:4:2
[Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:4:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bartenura%20on%20Mishnah%20Bava%20Kamma/r/2:4:2)

**שָׁלֹשׁ פְּעָמִים.** וַאֲפִלּוּ בְּיוֹם אֶחָד. וְאֵין הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי [מֵאִיר]. דְּלֹא הָוֵי מוּעָד עַד שֶׁיָּעִידוּ בּוֹ שְׁלֹשָׁה יָמִים:

**Bartenura on Mishnah, trans. by Rabbi Robert Alpert, 2020:**
שלשה פעמים – and even on one day (i.e., doing damage thrice on one day), but the Halakha is not according to Rabbi [Meir] for they are not forewarned until they testify about it for three days.


###### Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:4:3
[Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:4:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bartenura%20on%20Mishnah%20Bava%20Kamma/r/2:4:3)

**מְמַשְׁמְשִׁים בּוֹ.** מוֹשְׁכִים אוֹתוֹ וּמְשַׂחֲקִים בּוֹ וְאֵינוֹ נוֹגֵחַ. וּבְהָא הֲלָכָה [כְּרַבִּי מֵאִיר], שֶׁאֵין שׁוֹר מוּעָד חוֹזֵר לְתַמּוּתוֹ עַד שֶׁיְּהוּ תִּינוֹקוֹת מְשַׂחֲקִים בּוֹ:

**Bartenura on Mishnah, trans. by Rabbi Robert Alpert, 2020:**
ממשמשים בו – they pull at it and play with it and it doesn’t gore. And in this, the Halakha is according [to Rabbi Meir] that a forewarned bull does not return to its innocuous state until small children play with it [and it doesn’t gore].


###### Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:5:1
[Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:5:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bartenura%20on%20Mishnah%20Bava%20Kamma/r/2:5:1)

**נָגַח נָגַף וְכוּ'.** כֻּלָּן תּוֹלְדוֹת קֶרֶן הֵן:

**Bartenura on Mishnah, trans. by Rabbi Robert Alpert, 2020:**
נגח נגף [וכו'] – all of them are derivatives of the horn.


###### Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:5:2
[Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:5:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bartenura%20on%20Mishnah%20Bava%20Kamma/r/2:5:2)

**דַּיּוֹ לַבָּא מִן הַדִּין לִהְיוֹת כַּנִּדּוֹן.** קֶרֶן בִּרְשׁוּת הַנִּזָּק שֶׁאַתָּה מֵבִיא מִדִּין קֶרֶן בִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים, דְּקָאָמַרְתְּ קֶרֶן שֶׁהֶחְמִיר עָלֶיהָ בִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים אֵינוֹ דִּין שֶׁנַּחְמִיר עָלֶיהָ בִּרְשׁוּת הַנִּזָּק, דַּיּוֹ לִהְיוֹת כְּנִדּוֹן, כְּקֶרֶן בִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים, וְלֹא יִהְיֶה חַיָּב בִּרְשׁוּת הַנִּזָּק אֶלָּא חֲצִי נֶזֶק כְּמוֹ שֶׁהוּא חַיָּב בִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים:

**Bartenura on Mishnah, trans. by Rabbi Robert Alpert, 2020:**
דיו לבא מן הדין להיות כנדון – the “horn” in the domain of the one who suffered damages that you bring from the law of the “horn” in the public domain, and as you have said regarding the horn which [the Rabbis] were stringent about it in the public domain, does it not follow logically that we should be strict with it in the domain of the one who supported the damages. It is sufficient that it (i.e., the inferred law) should be like that of the premise, like the horn in the public domain, and not be liable in the domain of the one who suffered damages other than one-half damages just as he is liable in the private domain.


###### Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:5:3
[Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:5:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bartenura%20on%20Mishnah%20Bava%20Kamma/r/2:5:3)

**אֲנִי לֹא אָדוּן קֶרֶן מִקֶּרֶן.** כִּדְאָמְרָן לְעֵיל, אֶלָּא קֶרֶן מֵרֶגֶל. מְקוֹם שֶׁהֶחְמִיר עָלָיו בְּשֵׁן וָרֶגֶל אֵינוֹ דִּין שֶׁנַּחְמִיר בְּקֶרֶן:

**Bartenura on Mishnah, trans. by Rabbi Robert Alpert, 2020:**
אני לא אדון קרן מקרן – as we stated above, but rather the “horn” from the “foot.” The place where he was stringent upon him with the “tooth” and the “foot” does it not follow logically that we should be stringent with the “horn?”


###### Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:5:4
[Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:5:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bartenura%20on%20Mishnah%20Bava%20Kamma/r/2:5:4)

**דַּיּוֹ לַבָּא מִן הַדִּין.** דְּסוֹף סוֹף אִי לָאו קֶרֶן בִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים לֹא מַשְׁכַּחַת צַד קַל וָחֹמֶר. וְרַבִּי טַרְפוֹן אַף עַל גַּב דִּבְעָלְמָא אִית לֵיהּ דַּיּוֹ, דְּמִדְּאוֹרַיְתָא הוּא, דִּכְתִיב (במדבר יב) הֲלֹא תִּכָּלֵם שִׁבְעַת יָמִים, קַל וָחֹמֶר לַשְּׁכִינָה אַרְבָּעָה עָשָׂר יוֹם, אֶלָּא דַּיּוֹ לַבָּא מִן הַדִּין לִהְיוֹת כַּנִּדּוֹן, הִלְכָּךְ תִּסָּגֵר שִׁבְעַת יָמִים וְתוּ לֹא, מִכָּל מָקוֹם הָכָא לֵית לֵיהּ דַּיּוֹ, דִּסְבִירָא לֵיהּ לְרַבִּי טַרְפוֹן דְּכִי אָמְרִינַן דַּיּוֹ הֵיכָא דְּלֹא מִפְרִיךְ קַל וָחֹמֶר, כְּגוֹן הָתָם דְּשִׁבְעַת יָמִים דִּשְׁכִינָה לֹא כְּתִיבֵי, אֲתָא קַל וָחֹמֶר אַיְתֵי אַרְבֵּיסַר, אֲתָא דַּיּוֹ אַפֵּיק שִׁבְעָה, וְאוֹקֵי שִׁבְעָה, אִשְׁתָּכַח דְּאַהֲנֵי קַל וָחֹמֶר לְהָנֵי שִׁבְעָה דְּאוֹקִימְנָא וְלֹא אִפְּרִיךְ לְגַמְרֵי. אֲבָל הָכָא חֲצִי נֶזֶק כְּתִיב בֵּין בִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים בֵּין בַּחֲצַר הַנִּזָּק, וַאֲתָא קַל וָחֹמֶר וְאַיְּתִי חֲצִי נֶזֶק אַחֲרִינָא וְנַעֲשָׂה נֶזֶק שָׁלֵם, אִי דָּרְשַׁת דַּיּוֹ וְתוֹקְמֵיהּ אַחֲצִי נֶזֶק כִּדְמֵעִקָּרָא, אִפְרִיךְ לֵיהּ קַל וָחֹמֶר וְלֹא אַהֲנֵי וְלֹא מִידֵי. וְרַבָּנָן סָבְרֵי דַּאֲפִלּוּ הֵיכָא דְּמִפְרִיךְ קַל וָחֹמֶר אָמְרִינַן דַּיּוֹ. וַהֲלָכָה כַּחֲכָמִים:

**Bartenura on Mishnah, trans. by Rabbi Robert Alpert, 2020:**
דיו לבא מן הדין – for finally, if it is not the “horn” in the public domain, you will not find a side for an a-minori/a-majori. And Rabbi Tarfon, although that in general, he holds that it is enough for it is from the Torah as it is written (Numbers 12:14): “Would she not bear her shame for seven days?” All the more so for God’s presence for fourteen days, but it is enough if the inferred law be as strict as the premise, therefore, “she should be shut out of the camp for seven days” (Numbers 12:14) and no more than that. Nevertheless, here, he does not hold that it is enough for Rabbi Tarfon holds that when we state that it is enough where he didn’t refute an a-minori/a-majori such as there (i.e., Numbers 12:14) of the seven days of God’s Divine presence is not written [in the Biblical verse], the Kal V’Homer brings fourteen. The “it is enough” comes to exclude seven and to establish seven since it mentions this Kal V’Homer for these seven that has been established and it doesn’t refute it completely. But here, the half-damages are written, whether for the public domain or whether in the courtyard of the one who suffered damages, and the Kal V’aHomer comes and brings another one-half damage and makes it full damages. If he had expounded on the “it is enough” and you established ait as high-damages as at the beginning, I would raise to him the objection of the Kal V’Homer and not benefit from it at all. But the Rabbis hold that even where they raise the objection of the Kal V’Homer, we state it as “it is enough” and the Halakha is according to the Sages.


###### Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:6:1
[Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:6:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bartenura%20on%20Mishnah%20Bava%20Kamma/r/2:6:1)

**בֵּין עֵר בֵּין יָשֵׁן.** אִם הָיָה יָשֵׁן וּבָא אַחֵר וְיָשַׁן בְּצִדּוֹ, וְהִזִּיק שֵׁנִי לָרִאשׁוֹן, חַיָּב. וְאִם הִזִּיק רִאשׁוֹן לַשֵּׁנִי, פָּטוּר. וְאִם שָׁכְבוּ יַחַד, כָּל אֶחָד מֵהֶם שֶׁהִזִּיק אֶת חֲבֵרוֹ חַיָּב, לְפִי שֶׁשְּׁנֵיהֶם מוּעָדִים זֶה לָזֶה:

**Bartenura on Mishnah, trans. by Rabbi Robert Alpert, 2020:**
בין ער בין ישן – if he was sleeping and another [person] came and slept at his side, and he second damaged the first, he is liable, but if he first [person] damaged the second, he is exempt [from punishment]. But if they slept together, each one of them who caused damage to his fellow is liable, because of them are considered as forewarned regarding each other.


###### Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:6:2
[Bartenura on Mishnah Bava Kamma 2:6:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bartenura%20on%20Mishnah%20Bava%20Kamma/r/2:6:2)

**סִמֵּא אֶת עֵין חֲבֵרוֹ.** אֲפִלּוּ בְּשׁוֹגֵג חַיָּב בַּנֶּזֶק. אֲבָל לֹא בְּאַרְבָּעָה דְּבָרִים, דְּלֹא מִחַיַּב בְּאַרְבָּעָה דְּבָרִים אֶלָּא מֵזִיד, אוֹ קָרוֹב לְמֵזִיד:

**Bartenura on Mishnah, trans. by Rabbi Robert Alpert, 2020:**
סימא את עין חבירו – even inadvertently, he is liable for damages, but not for four things (see Talmud Bava Kamma 26a-b), for [the Torah] does not declare him liable for four things other than wanton action, or something close to wanton action.