Commentary for Bava Kamma 132:7

איתיביה אביי לרב יוסף עורות של בעל הבית מחשבה מטמאתן

[implying] but not one which was misappropriated'? Under what circumstances? That, for instance, wool was misappropriated and made into a bed? But is there any [accepted] view<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' With the exception of that of Beth Shammai (cf. supra p. 380). whose view is disregarded when in conflict with Beth Hillel (Tosaf.). ');">¹³</span> that a change [in substance] resulting from an act does not transfer ownership?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Would the bed in this case not become the legal property of the robber? ');">¹⁴</span>

Explore commentary for Bava Kamma 132:7. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.