Metaphysically done damage

Indeed, a justified reference. I highly doubt whether he really blinded him, just as I doubt whether Rabbi Zira was slaughtered at a Purim feast or whether the disciples of Hillel and Shammai killed each other. There are descriptions that are meant to leave an impression and not to provide historical evidence. The point is that the harm must be discussed in a specific way. As is well known, we have already discussed the Creator of Adam through a name, and salvation in a specific way (does the Sabbath reject, and evidence from David's Tzfat Shitin on the issue of plagues). But none of this is really necessary, and I think that here too the matter will remain dependent on interpretation. If you understand that harm in a mystical way is essentially an activation of the heavens, then it seems that the harm is exempt as a grama (and perhaps even worse than that), and if this is an ordinary way of harming, there is an interpretation for him to be liable. Now I thought that one should learn from the law of the evil eye (standing on the field of his neighbor in its heights), but the Maimonides apparently omitted that because in his opinion there is no such damage. And perhaps the discussion is really about a situation that does not exist (mystical damage).