Study Bava Kamma folio 19B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
But doesn’t R' Yoḥanan say: Payment of half the cost of the damage is not differentiated between private and public domains, as there is no exemption from payment neither for damage on private property nor for damage in the public domain? What, is this principle not stated even in a case where the
R' Yirmeya said to him: But didn’t you say: If there is no act of lifting here, is there an act of placing here? R' Zeira said to him: I retract my previous statement. Or, if you wish, say instead: When R' Yoḥanan said that payment of half the cost of the damage is not differentiated between priva
§ The Talmud relates that R' Yehuda Nesia and R' Oshaya sat in the antechamber [akil’a] of R' Yehuda Nesia. A matter emerged from among them and one of them raised a dilemma: If an animal swung its tail and thereby caused damage, what is the halakha? The other Sage said to him: Must the owner grasp
The Talmud rejects this: How can these cases be compared? Damage in the category of Goring is not caused in the course of the typical behavior of the animal. Consequently, the owner is required to prevent his animal from causing damage in that manner. This damage caused by the swinging of an animal
The Talmud asks: And since that is its typical behavior, what is the dilemma that he raised? Obviously one has no liability for the damage caused by the typical behavior of his animal in the public domain. The Talmud answers: He raised a dilemma with regard to a case of excessive tail swinging; is