העורך Editor

WILD (OX) PROFITEERING

By Rabbi Alexander London

BAVA KAMMA 34b

When a tame ox gores and kills another ox, the Torah states: “and also the carcass shall be divided” (Ex. 21:35). Rabi Yehuda learns from this verse that if the carcass went up in value before the case comes to court, the owner of the damaging ox shares in the appreciation. Thus we reduce the amount that he must pay for damages.

The Tur (OC 403) brings the rule that the owner of the damaging ox shares in the appreciation of the carcass by both a tame ox and a wild ox. The Drisha notes that the verse which is the source of this rule, “and also the carcass shall be divided”, is referring to a tame ox. How does the Tur know that the rule also applies to a wild ox?

The Drisha brings a further gemara which states: Since we see that the Torah gave the owner of the damaging ox a share in the appreciation of the carcass, I might say that he could come out with a profit. For example, if the ox which was gored was originally worth twenty zuz and its carcass went up in value to thirty zuz, I might say that the owner of the goring ox would take a share of the appreciation and come out gaining. Therefore the Torah stated, “He shall certainly pay” (Ex. 21:36); the owner of the damaging ox pays and does not take.

The Drisha notes that the verse, “He shall certainly pay”, is written by a wild ox. The Torah is telling us that the owner of the wild ox cannot come out with a profit. However, appreciation of the carcass can be used to reduce his liability. Thus the Tur ruled that even the owner of a wild ox shares in the appreciation of the carcass….

The slogan of “Elu Ve’elu” has conquered all. But there are plenty of cases where one or both sides are just wrong. When it comes to reality, for instance, if my position is based on a true conception of reality and yours on a false one, you lose.

This is true for the “debate” on women’s wigs (see here part one, p. 7). If the Heter is conditional upon claiming a fact which just isn’t so (e.g., wigs don’t have the same effect as hair), the legal ruling doesn’t stand at all. This is true for lighting the Chanuka Menorah in a fake “chatzer”, which really is not part of the same property (“reshus”).

And it’s true for “Kesem Kegris” as well. And yet, Rabbi Nissim Karelitz, with no shame, writes one may not even be stringent (Chut Shani on Niddah p. 155):

ואין לו להפקיע שיעבודו מאשתו

This appears to be a Reddish Herring.

Escorting guests four cubits Amos out of your home.

It’s not just for kinderlach.

The Internet Shiur is a discussion of critical information every Orthodox Jew needs to know about the internet. It provides a comprehensive worldview as well as specific technologies and detailed tips to enable safer internet usage. Featuring Rabbi Gil Student and organized together with Dovid Teitelbaum, this lecture gives you the ability to take control of your and your children’s internet experience.

Is the internet lechatchilah or bedieved, meaning is it a positive opportunity or a necessary evil? Should you let your children access the internet? Should you give them mobile devices? Can a man and woman who are not married communicate online? What do you do about the shmutz on the internet? All this and much more are addressed in The Internet Shiur.

The Internet Shiur is a six-part lecture. Search for the words “the internet shiur” on Torah Musings to find it, or see it directly on YouTube, here.

The Brisker school of Torah is explicitly against trusting our intellect. They say: Don’t ask ‘Why’ but ‘What’. Likewise: “A deficiency of explanation shows a lack in comprehension”.

Rabbi Yitzchak Zev Soloveitchik once said “our” generation was not a “Dor”, but a “dor’aleh”. Of course, this kind of solipsism can and might have been used in (or against), any generation whatsoever throughout history, from Adam to the last man standing. Why the arbitrary cut-off point? Speak for yourself.

For those who think this shows wisdom, Shlomo cries:

אל תאמר מה היה שהימים הראשונים היו טובים מאלה כי לא מחכמה שאלת על זה

Note the hypocrisy: He was not undermining medicine or physics. In all secular arenas of knowledge and endeavor, we are to trust our powers of deduction and speed right ahead. Only when it comes to Judaism are we to cloak ourselves with false humility and shy away from using our God-given brain. The Brisker counsel of despair does not affect sins, only virtues.

By the way, the above “dor’aleh” statement was in reference to the Chazon Ish; after his passing “we” were less than human. But anyone who knows real history knows Rabbi Soloveitchik fought an invisible war against everything about the Chazon Ish and his students, including after his death (and his family\followers never stopped, either).

And the historical Chazon Ish never said anything like this, forever giving Torah encouragement to all.