Study Bava Kamma folio 32A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
But if the owner of the cross beam stopped, causing the jug to collide with the beam and break, the former is liable, since the latter had no way of anticipating that he would stop. And if he said to the owner of the jug: Stop, he is exempt from liability for breaking the jug.
Conversely, if the owner of the jug was walking first and the owner of the cross beam last, and the jug was broken by the cross beam, the owner of the cross beam is liable. But if owner of the jug stopped, the owner of the cross beam is exempt from liability for breaking the jug. And if he said t
Talmud: Rabba bar Natan asked Rav Huna: With regard to one who causes injury to his wife during sex, what is the halakha? Is he liable to pay damages? Is it reasoned that since he is acting in a permitted manner he is exempt, or perhaps he should pay attention and be more careful?
Rav Huna said to Rabba bar Natan: You learned this halakha in the Mishnah concerning one person walking with a cross beam and another with a jug, which rules that the owner of the cross beam is exempt because this one had permission to walk and that one also had permission to walk. Similarly, since
Rava disagreed with Rav Huna’s opinion and said: The husband is liable due to an a fortiori inference from the halakha with regard to manslaughter, as it is stated in the Torah: “As when a man goes into the forest with his neighbor to chop wood…and the head slips off the helve, and finds his neighb