Commentary for Bava Metzia 187:10
ור' יוחנן אמר אפילו תימא בשלא קנו מידו בההיא הנאה דקא נפיק ליה קלא דאיניש מהימנא הוא גמיר ומשעבד נפשיה:
But can you assign it to R. Judah? Then consider the second clause: A STIPULATION CONTRARY TO A SCRIPTURAL ENACTMENT is NULL: does not this agree with R. Meir? — That is no difficulty; in truth, it is R. Judah's view, but this second clause does not refer to civil matters. Then consider the latter clause: EVERY STIPULATION WHICH IS PRECEDED BY AN ACTION IS NULL. Now, whom do you know to hold this view? R. Meir. For it has been taught: Abba Halafta, of Kefar Hananiah,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [A village in Galilee, v. Klein, S., NB, p. 28.] ');"><sup>9</sup></span>
Explore commentary for Bava Metzia 187:10. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.