DAMAGE THAT IS NOT VISIBLE (Yerushalmi Perek 5 Halachah 5 Daf 29b)

מתני' המטמא והמדמע והמנסך אם שוגג פטור ואם מזיד חייב


(Mishnah): If one was Metamei [another's Taharos], Medame'a (mixed Chulin with Terumah, which forbids it to Zarim), or was Menasech (this connotes pouring libations to idolatry; this is discussed below) b'Shogeg, he is exempt. If he was Mezid, he must pay.

הכהנים שפיגלו במקדש מזידין חייבין:


If Kohanim were Mefagel (disqualified a Korban through intent to eat or offer some of it outside the allowed time or place) in the Mikdash b'Mezid, they are liable [to pay for it].

גמ' ר' יודן לא נחת לבית וועדא קם עם ר' מנא אמר ליה מה חדתין יימרון.


(Gemara): R. Yudan did not go to the Beis Midrash. He encountered R. Mana, and asked what Chidush was said [there];

אמר ליה כן א"ר יוסי המטמא אינו כעושה מעשה.


R. Mana: R. Yosi said, one who is Metamei is not like one who does an action.

(מן הדא) [צ"ל ולאו מתניתא היא - הגהות ר' יוסף דיננער] תרומה וניטמאת.


R. Yudan: Do we not learn this from a Mishnah? [If one stole] Terumah, and it became Tamei [He returns it. If Metamei were like one who does an action, he should need to pay for Tahor Terumah!]

אמר ליה תיפתר שניטמאת מאיליה. ולית שמע מינה כלום.


Rebuttal (R. Yosi): Perhaps [the Mishnah] discusses Terumah that became Tamei automatically, and you cannot learn from it anything [about whether or not Metamei is like an action]!

(דהיא) [צ"ל אלא מהדא - הגהות ר' יוסף דיננער] מתניתא דן את הדין זיכה את החייב וחייב את הזכאי טימא את הטהור טיהר את הטמא.


(R. Yosi): Rather, we learn from this Mishnah. If one judged a case and vindicated the one who is [truly] liable and obligated the Zakai, or he was Metamei what is Tahor and Metaher what is Tamei, [he is liable. We explained this like HAGAHOS R. DINAR];

דמר רב ירמיה בשם רב במגיעו לידו.


(R. Yirmeyah citing Rav): The case is, he physically touched [Tum'ah to the Taharos] with his hand (to remove any doubt that they are Tahor. He is liable to pay. This shows that Metamei is like an action.)

ושמואל אמר במגיעו לידו.


(Shmuel): The case is, he physically touched with his hand.

רבי יהודה בר' [צ"ל חייה - הגהות ר' יוסף דיננער] אומר בדין [דף ל עמוד א] היה אפילו שוגג שיהא חייב ולמה אמרו פטור כדי שיהא מודיע.


(R. Yehudah b'Ribi R. Chiyah): According to letter of the law, even Shogeg should be liable. Why did they say that he is exempt? It is in order to that he will inform (that he was Metamei, and not refrain because he does not want to pay).

ורבי יוחנן אמר בדין היה שאפי' במזיד יהא פטור ולמה אמרו חייב משום קנס.


(R. Yochanan): According to letter of the law, even Mezid should be exempt (the Torah obligates only for visible damage). Why did they say that he is liable? It is a fine [to stop people from being Metamei others' Taharos].

(חייליה) [צ"ל מילתא - הגהות ר' יוסף דיננער] דר' יוחנן מן הדא המטמא והמדמע והמנסך בשוגג פטור במזיד חייב ואמר ר' יוחנן ומשום קנס.


R. Yochanan's opinion was inferred [from the following. He did not say so explicitly. Our Mishnah says that] if one was Metamei, Medame'a, or Menasech b'Shogeg, he is exempt. If he was Mezid, he must pay, and R. Yochanan said that it is a fine.

מתניתא מסייעא לר' יוחנן הנותן עול על גבי פרתו של חבירו פטור מדיני אדם וחייב בדיני שמים.


Support (for R. Yochanan - Beraisa): One who puts a yoke on another's Parah [Adumah, which disqualifies it,] is exempt bi'Ydei Adam and liable bi'Ydei Shamayim.