Commentary for Bava Metzia 191:2

וכתיב בעליו אין עמו שלם ישלם משמע דליתיה בתרוייהו משמע נמי דכי איתיה בחדא וליתיה בחדא חייב

But may I not reverse it? — It is logical that the time of the loan is stronger [in remitting liability], in that it brings it [the animal] into his possession. On the contrary, are not injury and death more likely [to cancel responsibility], since he then becomes [actually] liable for accidents? — Were there no loan, what would injury and death effect?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., though the actual payment must be made on account of these, it is the fact of loan which conditions it. ');">¹</span>

Explore commentary for Bava Metzia 191:2. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.