Commentary for Bava Kamma 73:15

אלא אי אמרת ואינו מועד קתני הא סתמא הוי מועד השתא י"ל מבהמה לבהמה סתמא הוי מועד מאדם לבהמה צריכא למימר דהוי מועד

— R. Zebid may, however, say to you: The opening clause refers to the reversion of the ox to the state of <i>Tam</i>, as, e.g., where the ox had been <i>mu'ad</i> to man and <i>mu'ad</i> to beast but has subsequently refrained from [doing damage to] beast, having stood near cattle on three different occasions without goring. It might then have been argued that since it has not refrained from injuring men, its refraining from goring cattle should [in the eye of the law] not be considered a proper reversion [to the state of <i>Tam</i>].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. supra p. 119. ');">¹²</span>

Explore commentary for Bava Kamma 73:15. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.