Here we'll talk again about two different properties owned by different people that are right next to each other. There's an olive press that had a portion of it built into a sela, into a rock, into a mountain. And there was a garden that belonged to a different person, in the earth that covered the top of that chamber. Then the chamber fell in, causing the garden that was there to fall in and collapse as well. So the owner of the olive press would be required to fix the roof. Even though they shared the roof in this situation, it was expected that the owner of the olive press would fix it because the olive press can't work without the roof. Water would get into it and would destroy it. So the standard expectation was that the owner of the olive press would fix the roof.
And let's say he didn't want to. He didn't want to do it. We say that the owner of the garden is allowed to go down and plant his seeds in the dirt floor of the chamber until the owner of the olive press makes a new roof for the olive press chamber. And then the garden can be replanted. So until that time, the owner of the garden is allowed to do what he wants and plant below.
Now we'll talk about a piece of property that fell down and caused damage. When a piece of private property falls into the public domain, a person would have to pay for it if he was negligent. But if it was an unavoidable thing that wasn't really within his control, then he would not have to pay for it. Here we'll talk about something that fell down and caused damage. Mishnah continues: If somebody's wall or tree fell into the street and caused damage, then under normal circumstances, the person wouldn't be obligated to pay for the damages because it's an unavoidable accident. We're talking about a situation where it was a regular, sturdy tree or wall, and there was a major earthquake or something that knocked it down and caused damage. There was no reason for the owner of that wall to think that it would fall. So therefore, he's not responsible for the actual fall. But if it was a non-sturdy tree or wall, then the owner would be responsible.
But if it was in danger of falling and the beit din (court) analyzed it, they periodically went around town to survey everything and make sure that things were safe. If they did notice that it was something that was going to fall within a certain amount of time, they would warn the owner and tell him that he had a certain amount of time to take down the tree or the wall. If the court gave a set time—for example, they told the owner of the wall, “You have 30 days to take care of the problem, to cut down the tree or to take down the wall”—and it fell and caused damage before those 30 days were up, he's patur. He would not be obligated to pay for the damage. It wasn't expected that the tree or the wall would fall down. That's why the beit din gave a certain amount of time. They said, “Oh, you know what? We don't feel like it's going to fall down any moment. You have 30 days. Don't worry about it. For 30 days, you could take it down.” So if it fell before the 30 days were up, he shouldn't be held responsible because it's an accident. It wasn't expected that it would fall down. But if it fell down after the time that the beit din set, he was negligent. He should have taken it down within that time, and he didn't. So therefore, he would be obligated to pay for the damages because he didn't take it down in the proper time.