Commentary for Bava Kamma 214:9

אמר רב ששת הטוען טענת גנב בפקדון כיון ששלח בו יד פטור מאי טעמא הכי קאמר רחמנא ונקרב בעל הבית אל האלהים אם לא שלח ידו וגו' הא שלח ידו פטור

who had in his defence pleaded loss and had sworn thus, but came afterwards and pleaded theft,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Regarding the same deposit. ');">¹⁸</span> also confirming it by an oath, though witnesses appeared [proving otherwise], would be exempt.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' From double payment. ');">¹⁹</span> Now, is the reason of this ruling not because the deposit had already been transferred to his possession through the first<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 616, n. 2. ');">²⁰</span>

Explore commentary for Bava Kamma 214:9. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.