Commentary for Bava Batra 155:10

לעולם בשאין עודן עליו מחלוקת ורבנן היא ואימא ובזמן שאמר לו הוא וכל מה שראוי להיות עליו

If, however, it is assumed that the dispute [relates to the case] when they<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. n. 8. ');">³²</span> are not upon it,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. n. 9. ');">³³</span> but that [in case] they are upon it both agree that they are [implicitly] included in the sale, to whom [could] this [Baraitha be assigned]?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Neither to the Rabbis nor to Nahum the Mede, since both have been assumed to agree that in the case when the saddle etc. were upon the ass they are implicitly included in the sale, while according to the Baraitha these are not included unless 'it and all upon it', had been explicitly stated at the time of the sale. ');">³⁴</span> — It may still be said that the dispute relates to the case when they are not upon it, and the Baraitha may be assigned to the Rabbis, but read: If, however, he said unto him, 'it and all that ought<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Baraitha accordingly relates to the case when the saddle etc. were not upon the ass. ');">³⁵</span>

Explore commentary for Bava Batra 155:10. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.