Commentary for Bava Kamma 135:20

אלא דלא משכחת דמשלמי תרוייהו גנב ראשון וגנב שני אלא בהכי:

Now, since it is the time after Renunciation with which we are dealing, if you assume that Renunciation transfers ownership, why should the second 'not pay anything but the principal'?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Why not pay double to the first thief who had already become the legal owner of the object through Renunciation? ');">¹⁵</span>

Explore commentary for Bava Kamma 135:20. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.