Kiddushin - Daf 24
- An עבד כנעני goes free for destruction of any of the ראשי אברים
It was taught in a Baraisa: יוצא בשן ועין – [A slave] goes free for destruction of a tooth or eye, וראשי אברים שאינן חוזרים – or the ends of limbs which do not regenerate. A tooth and eye are written explicitly, and both had to be written, to clarify that loss of a baby tooth does not set him free, and that the loss of an adult tooth does (despite his not being born with it). The Gemara explains that all other ראשי אברים are derived from a כלל ופרט וכלל: מה שן ועין מומין שבגלוי ואינן חוזרין – Just as losing a tooth and an eye causes an exposed blemish, and they do not regenerate, אף כל מומין שבגלוי ואינן חוזרין – so too, loss of all limbs which cause an exposed blemish and do not regenerate, a slave goes free when the master destroys them. The Gemara asks that if so, a loss of function should also be required (similar to losing an eye’s sight and a tooth’s chewing), yet a Baraisa teaches that if his beard is pulled, dislocating a bone, he does go free!? The Gemara concludes that this sequence is darshened as the more expansive ריבה ומיעט וריבה and excludes only הכהו על ידו וצמתה וסופה לחזור – where he hit him on his hand and it withered but will eventually return to health.
- שן ועין and other damages through sound
A Baraisa teaches that although a slave goes free if struck on the eye and blinded or on the ear and deafened, but נגד עינו ואינו רואה – if he struck a place opposite his eye and shocked him, and now he cannot see, or כנגד אזנו ואינו שומע – opposite his ear, and now he cannot hear, the slave does not go free. Rav Shemen objected to Rav Ashi about the implication that one is not liable for damage through sound, because Rami bar Yechezkel said that a rooster which crowed into a glass vessel and broke it, the owner is liable, and Rav taught that a horse or donkey which damaged by neighing or braying, the owner is liable!? Rav Ashi answered that a man damaged through sound is different: דכיון דבר דעת הוא איהו מיבעית נפשיה – since he is an intelligent being, he shocks himself by focusing on the sudden noise, and the producer of the noise is not responsible. This is demonstrated by a Baraisa which teaches that if someone frightens his fellow and injures him (e.g, he shouts into his ear, deafening him), פטור מדיני אדם וחייב בדיני שמים – he is exempt from paying under man’s laws (i.e., Beis Din will not compel him to pay), but is liable according to Heavenly law.
- Requirement of destructive intent for שן ועין
A Baraisa teaches that if the master was a doctor, and the slave asked him to medicate his eye, and in the process the master blinded him, the Tanna Kamma says: שיחק באדון ויצא לחירות – he laughs at the master and goes free. Rebbe Shimon ben Gamliel says: "ושחתה" – the pasuk says “and he shall destroy it,” teaching he does not go free עד שיתכוין לשחתה – until [the master] intends to destroy [the limb] but does not go free for unintentional destruction. The Rabbonon darshen this word for the law taught by Rebbe Elazar in another Baraisa: הרי שהושיט ידו למעי שפחתו – If he stretched his hand into his slavewoman’s womb to deliver her baby, וסימא עובר שבמעיה – and inadvertently blinded the fetus in her womb, he is not responsible, because the word "ושחתה" teaches, according to this opinion, that he must at least intend to act on the eye (even if he did not intend to damage it).
