Our Gemara and Mishna on Amud Aleph discuss the idea of Adam Muad Le-Olam: “The legal status of a person is always that of one forewarned. Therefore, whether the damage was unintentional or intentional, whether he was awake while he caused the damage or asleep, whether he blinded another’s eye or broke vessels, he must pay the full cost of the damage.”
There is a three-way dispute amongst the Rishonim as to the extent of this liability. According to Tosafos (ibid 27b “U-Shmuel”) a person is liable for damage that results from lacking some degree of watchfulness, but not necessarily excessive caution. Tosafos compares this to the liability of a voluntary watchman, who is liable for accidental loss, but not for theft. The theory being that, although he could have been even more careful, the theft came about from the active plotting of a nefarious party in contradistinction to a situation where the object gets lost, while unintentional, it still has some negligence mixed in with it. On the other end of the spectrum we have Ramban’s opinion (Bava Metzia 82b) that a person is liable for all damages that result from his behavior, even if it was completely out of his control, and there was zero negligence. Finally, we have the middle opinion of the Nimukei Yosef in our Gemara, who holds that a person is not liable for damages that were utterly out of the person’s control, but if somehow, it could have been prevented, he is still liable, even if there was no negligence.
Regardless, we see a powerful, moral imperative that holds a person liable to a high standard. The Shalah (Shenei Luchos HaBeris, Torah Shebiksav, Balak, Derekh Chayim) explains that a person is responsible to use his intellect to “connect the dots”, so as not to miss clues and warning signs. This is why Bilaam characterized himself as a sinner for not noticing the angel, even though he did not see him. Because he should have paid attention to the signs of distress that his donkey was showing. Furthermore, Shalah (Asara Maamaros, FourthMaamar) explains that we therefore see the degree of intellectual development incurs a proportionate greater liability for one’s actions. Just as a human is more liable than an animal, so too the more intellectually and spiritually developed, the more that person is liable. This is why we have the well principle that God is more exacting with the righteous (Yevamos 121b).
One might wonder, why is it all worth it? Why work to attain a higher intellectual or spiritual level if it occurs greater liability. The answer is that there is a universal principle of risk/reward ratio. It is fascinating to note that when one sees a pattern repeat itself throughout the material and spiritual world, it is probably indicative of a deep, Godly truth. No matter whether you are investing in stocks, or making an effort to preserve and promote your health, or if you are trying to develop intimacy and love, or if you’re trying to become more religious, the more you risk, the more you stand to gain. The less you risk, the safer you might be, but there will be less opportunity for gain. I am unaware of any exception to this rule in any part of life.
Translations Courtesy of Sefaria, except when, sometimes, I disagree with the translation 
Do you like what you see? Please subscribe and also forward any articles you enjoy to your friends, (enemies too, why not?)