Commentary for Bava Batra 156:1

מלתא אחריתי קאמר

speaks of a different case.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' While the dispute between the first Tanna and Nahum the Mede may still relate to the case when the ass does not wear its equipment and both of them may be in agreement in the case when the ass does wear it, R. Judah may yet differ from them and hold that the equipment. even if worn by the ass, is sometimes not included in the sale. ');">¹</span> Rabina said to R. Ashi: Come and hear! [We learnt:] He who sold a waggon has not sold the mules.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Mishnah, supra 77b. ');">²</span> And R. Tahlifa the Palestinian recited in the presence of R. Abbahu: He who sold the waggon has sold the mules; and [the master] said unto him: Surely we have learned that he has not sold! And he replied. Shall I cancel it? And [the master] said to him: No; your teaching may be interpreted [as dealing with the case] where [the mules] were harnessed to it. From this it must be inferred that the Mishnah [speaks of the case] where [the mules] are not harnessed [to the waggon]; and since the first part<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Mishnah, supra 77b. ');">²</span>

Explore commentary for Bava Batra 156:1. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.