Hybrid categories of damages TB Baba Kama 6

We all know there are four major categories of damages (Ox; Pit; Maveh; and the Fire) and that if a person causes damages, he is liable. Sometimes the damage does not exactly fall within the parameters of one of the categories. Consequently, for the person to be liable a hybrid damage, meaning the combination of two categories, must be created. Daf 6 TB Baba Kama provides four examples where a hybrid damage is needed to explain why the person is liable.

The first case describes a person putting a knife, a stone, or a heavy load on the roof and the wind blows it off the roof onto the ground. If one of those things falls on a person, the category of damage has to be fire since “another force is involved with it in causing damage, as it is the wind that causes the fire to spread and cause damage; and the entity propelled by the wind is your property, and responsibility for its safeguarding, to prevent it from causing damage, is incumbent upon you. In these cases, too, another force is involved with them in causing damage; and the objects are your property, and responsibility for their safeguarding, to prevent them from causing damage, is incumbent upon you.” (Sefaria.org translation) But when the knife, stone, or heavy load lands on the ground and remains there and after a while it damages a person, the category now is a pit. “What is notable about the primary category of Pit? It is notable in that there is no other force involved with it in causing the damage. Will you say the same with regard to these cases, where there is another force involved with it in causing the damage, i.e., the wind that propelled them from the roof to rest on the ground?” (Sefaia.org translation) By creating a hybrid damage consisting of both the pit and fire, we’ve successfully explained he why the person is liable for the damage.

The second case concerns a movable pit. Rashi explains the case to be a stone was placed where it did no damage, but it was kicked by another person or animal to a place where it did caused damage. We need to put the ox category and the pit categories together to create liability. The case of the stone doesn’t exactly fit the category of the pit because a pit requires a person to cause the damage e.g. a person placing a stone in the middle of the street. Consequently. We need to include the ox category create a hybrid category because like the ox the stone moved from one place to another. Both categories are needed.

The third case concerns flushing gutters during the rainy season. People are permitted to flush their gutters of water or sewage during the rainy season because the streets are already a mess and are forbidden to flush them during the dry season for all the obvious reasons. We also know that the person is still liable for damages caused by opening up his gutters during the rainy season. Although the stationary water or sewage does not neatly fall into the pit category because it was done with permission. Consequently we need to include the ox category to create a hybrid category because by opening up the gutters the water or sewage moved. Both categories are needed.

The fourth case concerns a fallen tree or wall from a private domain onto the public domain. The owner of the tree or wall is given a grace period to remove the tree or the wall from the public domain. Obviously after the grace period is over and he fails to pick up the tree or the wall, he is liable. Nevertheless, he is still liable for damages caused during that grace period. A hybrid category containing both the ox and the pit are needed to explain his liability during the grace period. Both categories are needed.

Read the daf for a fuller explanation how each category of damages is insufficient by itself to engender liability.