Commentary for Bava Kamma 151:10
רבי שמעון אומר וכו': אמרי נהי דסבר ר"ש מה לי מכרו להדיוט מה לי מכרו לשמים איפכא מיבעי ליה
Why not make the distinction in stating the very case itself: 'This ruling applies only in the case of minor sacrifices, but where he sanctified it for the most holy sacrifices he would have to make four-fold or five-fold payment [for the very act of consecration]'? — We must therefore still say that there is no difference whether [the animal was consecrated for the] most holy sacrifices or merely for minor sacrifices, and to the difficulty raised by you. 'What difference does it make to me whether he disposed of it to a private owner or whether he disposed of it to the ownership of Heaven', [it might be said in answer that] where he disposed of it to a private owner it was previously the ox of Reuben and has now become the ox of Simeon,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the transfer from the thief to the purchaser was complete in every respect. ');"><sup>9</sup></span>
Explore commentary for Bava Kamma 151:10. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.