Skip to main content

Thought for the Day: Learning from One Scenario to Another

So... we had a question about whether a vessel is considered broken from the time it is launched toward certain doom or only after impact.  Case in point was Mrs. O'Learystein's cow kicking Yehuda's crystal ice bucket from the public thoroughfare into Yehuda's living room and smashing against the wall.  The gemara wants to learn what to do from the case of  Reuvein knocking his vase off the roof and Shimon smashing it with a bat before it hits the ground.  Since we know the halacha in the latter case (Shimon is patur), the gemara asserts that the underlying reason must be that the vessel was considered broken from the time it was knocked over.  The gemara then applies that reason to the the case of the cow kicking the bucket and concludes that Mrs O'Learystein does not need to reimburse Yehuda because the damage halachically occured int the public thoroughfare.

Proofs like these are tricky.  It is true that the proposed reason explains the halacha, but there could be other reasons that explain the halacha equally well.  In fact, a much easier explanation is that when Reuvein knocked his vase off the roof and realized how it was going to end, that he simply relinquished ownership and that's why Shimon is patur.  On the other hand, if you say he hadn't given up hope because maybe it wouldn't break or the pieces would be big enough to repair... then how could Shimon be patur; ie, how can it be considered broken already when it might not break at all?  That is, we can only compare this to our case if it is certain to break, but then Reuvein certainly relinquishes ownership so it it not comparable to our case, but then it must not be certain to break, but then Reuvein does not relinquish ownership, so it is not comparable to our case, but the gemara says that it is comparable to our case, so it must be destined for certain breakitude, but then... round and round she goes!

R' Shimon Shkop breaks the circuit (bu not the vase) by distinguishing between when we assert that someone relinquishes ownership and when someone becomes obligated in damages.  To be concrete (like our sidewalk), assume that there is a 10% chance that the vase will not break on impact (so maybe our sidewalk isn't concrete, but AstroTurf).  From Reuevein's perspective, since there is a 10% chance of survival he is not giving up hope and so retains ownership.  On the other hand, from Shimon's perspective there is 90% chance it will break; Shimon can therefore not be held responsible for breaking the vase... it was already considered broken.

In other words: we have used "hamotzi mei'chaveiro alav ha'raya" on both sides.  More to come...

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Thought for the Day: Battling the Evil Inclination on all Fronts

Yom Kippur.  When I was growing up, there were three annual events that marked the Jewish calendar: eating matzos on Passover, lighting candles on Chanuka, and  fasting on Yom Kippur.  Major news organizations around the world report on the "surreal" and "eerie" quiet of the streets in even the most secular neighborhoods of Israel.  Yom Kippur.

As you know, I am observant of Jewish law.  Some have even called me "ultra orthodox" (not in a kind way).  Given that, I have a question.  How likely do you think that I would be tempted to eat on Yom Kippur, that most holy day of the year?  Let's make the scale zero to ten, where zero is "as likely as driving through McDonald's on Shabbos and ordering a Big Mac with extra cheese." and ten is "as likely as breathing regularly".  Take your time.  If you answered "zero"; thank you, but -- sadly and penitently -- no.  The answer is more like nine; I'd like to say lower, but i…

Thought for the Day: Using a Mitzvah Object for Non-Mitzvah Purposes

As I am -- Baruch HaShem -- getting older, I am more cognizant of the fact that I'd like to stay as healthy as possible right up the moment I leave this world.  Stuff hurting is not the problem (I am told there is an old Russian saying that once you are 40, if you wake up and nothing hurts -- you're dead), stuff not working, however, is a problem.  To that end, for several years now I commute to work by bicycle (weather permitting, 30 minutes on an elliptical machine when weather does not permit).  I recently took up some upper body weight training.  Not because I want to be governor of California, just simply to slow down loss of bone mass and extend my body's healthy span.  Simple hishtadlus.  I have an 18 month old grandson who is just the right weight for arm curls (yes... I am that weak), so I do about 10 reps when I greet him at night.  He laughs, I get my exercise; all good.  (Main problem is explaining to the older ones why zeidy can't give them the same "…

Thought for the Day: Thanking HaShem Each and Every Day for Solid Land Near Water

Each and every morning, a Jew is supposed to view himself as a new/renewed creation, ready for a new day of building his eternal self through Torah and mitzvos.  We begin the day with 16 brachos to praise/thank/acknowledge HaShem for giving us all the tools we need to succeed.  We have a body, soul, and intellect.  We have vision, mobility, and protection from the elements.  Among those brachos, we have one that perhaps seems a bit out of place: רוקע הארץ על המים/Who spreads out the land on/over the water.  After all, it's nice to have a dry place to walk, but does that compare to the gratitude I have for a working body and vision?  As it turns out, I should; as explained by the R' Rajchenbach, rosh kollel of Kollel Zichron Eliyahu (aka, Peterson Park Kollel).  Your best bet is to listen to the shiur; very distant second is to continue, which I hope will whet your appetite for the real thing.

First... since we have dry land, I don't have to slog to work through even a foot…