I could not remember having seen any judgement concluded on the basis of what almost happened, or could have happened, had not other events intervened. Is Raba indulging in a fallacy, or is there ever such a matter?
H David Levine, Roanoke, VA USA
I have to admit that your conception has something to it, since Rav Ashi's opinion is more or less as you asked. But it is possible to explain Rava's opinion as not about a judgment or a financial charge when we determine that the bull is a Shor Mu'ad after three attempts to strike. Shor Tam or Shor Mu'ad is the status of the bull and its rank as a Mazik, to obligate the owner to keep it in a safe place. It is not an exaggeration to say that if a bull wanted to kill and did not succeed, it is already identified as a dangerous bull that requires better attention and guarding.
It is possible to argue, of course, and say that if the bull did not succeed, it is not so dangerous, but the debate is quite legitimate.
Best Regards,
Aharon Steiner