Page 308 - EFI-RAV ZILBERSTIN_VOL 8.EFI-RAV ZILBERSTIN_VOL 8.1A

Pg: 308 - 10-Front 21-10-31

gradually improved and was transferred to the rehabilitation depart-
ment, from where he was discharged home. [It should be pointed that
inquiries revealed no other possible predisposing risk factors, such as
high blood pressure, heart disease, diabetes, or others.]

The basic question that was addressed to me was whether or not
there was any connection between the incident in the store and the
storeowner’s malady that could determine whether or not he is enti-
tled to compensation. [I did not find any causal connection between
the incident in the store and the development of the brain obstruc-
tion.]

My question is: according to Torah law, are there grounds for
compensating the storeowner for the damage, for his illness and for
the disability with which it left him, should it transpire that there is
some connection between the incident in the store and his illness?
Are there grounds for obligating the woman, either in a beis din, or in
the Heavenly court to make good the damage and the disability that
he suffered?

Dr. A. Rubenstein, Specialist in Neu-
rosurgery

ɳ Response

Two horse traders were bitter enemies. One of them encountered
the other and picking up a rifle called to him,“See, you evildoer, how
Hashem has put you in my power – the time has come to take re-
venge on you!” He fired the weapon but it only contained paper which
caught fire. At the crack of the gunpowder and the burst of flame, the
other fellow collapsed and expired. The Chavos Yair (170) was asked
whether the “assailant” needs to repent. He responded: “He certainly
needs to repent earnestly…but he is exempt [from punishment] in
a human court, for someone who scares his colleague is exempt in a
human court but is liable [for punishment] in the Heavenly court, by
the One who examines people’s hearts (Bava Kama 56a).”

The Chavos Yair adds (ibid.): “I read in one of their legal tomes

292 1 Medical-Halachic Responsa of Rav Zilberstein