Q&A: Indirect Causation in Damages
Indirect Causation in Damages
Question
Hello Rabbi Michi.
The Talmud in the chapter HaKones brings four cases in which someone who causes damage to another is exempt under human law but liable under the laws of Heaven.
The Talmud does not say whether there was intent to cause damage or not. For example, in the case of one who bends another person’s standing grain in front of a fire—did he intend to cause damage or not? {Although in the case of one who breaches a fence in front of another person’s animal, it can be inferred that perhaps there is intent to cause damage.}
So my question is: in indirect causation in damages, does intention matter? Or since it is indirect causation, does intention make no difference? Thank you.
Answer
The medieval authorities (Rishonim) and later authorities (Acharonim) discussed the question of intent in the law of indirect causation. See, for example, Nachmanides in his treatise Dinei DeGarmi. For example, Meiri on 55b wrote that de-garmi is with intent, whereas gerama is without intent. See an overview here: https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%92%D7%A8%D7%9E%D7%90_%D7%91%D7%A0%D7%96%D7%99%D7%A7%D7%99%D7%9F