Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mi Yodeya is a question and answer site for those who base their lives on Jewish law and tradition and anyone interested in learning more. It's 100% free, no registration required.

What is the source of the פטור (exemption) of הקדש by נזקי אדם (damage to property done by a person)?

Tosfos on Bava Kama 7a (continued from 6b sv שור רעהו; on 7a, beginning of narrow lines) teaches that the פטור of all מזיקים when they damage הקדש is from a מה הצד between אדם, קרן, and שור פסולי המוקדשים by בור. Now I know that קרן is פטור from "שור רעהו ולא שור של הקדש" (bottom of 6b) and שור פסולי המוקדשים comes from "והמת יהיה לו" (later on, 10a (before the 2 dots)); but where does נזקי אדם come from?


Note: This question is not a question according to Rashi, because he holds that all מזיקים are פטורים by הקדש because of the פסוק of רעהו -- Rashi on 9b sv נכסים שאין בהם מעילה.

share|improve this question
    
Is it so obvious that Rashi holds that there's no nizkei adam for hekdesh? His second explanation sounds very much like there would be, with the exception of karka –  Matt Jul 9 at 3:37
    
@Matt Which "second explanation" are you referring to? –  Shokhet Jul 9 at 3:40
    
Rashi gives two explanations for the petur of hekdesh on the bottom of 6b. Sorry if I'm wrong, this is from memory and I can't look it up now –  Matt Jul 9 at 3:45
    
@Matt Even according to the Maharshal's reading of that Rashi, I think the lishna basra is just saying that shein and regel would be liable, not אדם. A brief discussion of the Maharam's reading vs. the Maharshal's reading can be found on the KBY website. –  Fred Jul 9 at 3:57

1 Answer 1

up vote 2 down vote accepted

Tosafos (Bava M'tzi'a' 99b, s.v. פרט למזיק) indicate that the exegetical basis for the teaching found in the mishna (Bava Kama 9b, נכסים שאין בהן מעילה) and the Y'rushalmi (Gitin 5:1, דתני רבי חייה נזקין להדיוט ואין נזקין לגבוה) that אדם is not liable for damages to הקדש is found in Chagiga (10b, מעילה דילפא חטא חטא מתרומה), where a גזרה שווה is made between a verse about מעילה in Vayikra (5:13, נֶפֶשׁ כִּי תִמְעֹל מַעַל וְחָטְאָה בִּשְׁגָגָה) and a verse about תרומה in B'midbar (18:32, וְלֹא תִשְׂאוּ עָלָיו חֵטְא בַּהֲרִימְכֶם אֶת חֶלְבּוֹ מִמֶּנּוּ; see also Rashi to Chagiga ad loc., s.v. מעילה ילפינן).

Tosafos indicate that just as a person is only liable for benefiting from t'ruma (per Vayikra 22:14), so to is a person not liable for merely damaging hekdesh.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.