Commentary for Bava Batra 304:7

צריכא דאי איתמר בהא בהא קאמר רב משום דקנו מיניה אבל בהא דלא קנו מיניה אימא מודה ליה לשמואל ואי איתמר בהא בהא קאמר שמואל אבל בהך אימא מודה ליה לרב צריכא

to [his opinion], because symbolic acquisition took place;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'they acquired for him'. And since the donee's claim has a double force, that of the gift of a dying man and that of symbolic acquisition, the gift cannot be withdrawn. ');">²¹</span> but in this case,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'in that', ');">¹⁹</span> where no symbolic acquisition took place, it might have been suggested [that] he agrees with Samuel.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hence the second case was necessary. ');">²²</span> And if [their dispute] had been stated [in connection] with the second case,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'in that', ');">¹⁹</span>

Explore commentary for Bava Batra 304:7. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.