Commentary for Avodah Zarah 102:20
מאן דמתני אסיפא כ"ש ארישא ומאן דמתני ארישא אבל אסיפא כיון דאיכא אחרים בהדה אפי' בטובת כומרין נמי שפיר דמי:
One who teaches it in reference to the second clause, would all the more so teach it in reference to the first clause; but one who teaches it in reference to the first clause, would in connection with the second clause say that since there are other owners, one can make payment even to the priests.
Daf Shevui to Avodah Zarah
If one teaches Abaye’s statement in reference to the second clause, then he could also teach it in reference to the first clause. In neither case can one make payment directly to the priests.
But if one teaches the statement in reference to the first clause, then when it comes to the second clause, where the bathhouse or garden is jointly owned, he can even make payment to the priests. Since the whole bathhouse or garden does not belong to the idolatrous temple, we can say he is using the part owned by others.
But if one teaches the statement in reference to the first clause, then when it comes to the second clause, where the bathhouse or garden is jointly owned, he can even make payment to the priests. Since the whole bathhouse or garden does not belong to the idolatrous temple, we can say he is using the part owned by others.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy