Commentary for Bava Kamma 197:4

אי הכי נותן לו דמי צמרו וסמנין מיבעי ליה אלא שמואל דחויי קא מדחי ליה

Would he really have to pay the combined value of the wool and the increase? Must we not therefore say that Samuel did not hold the view of R. Assi?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' According to whom even then only the original value of the wool would have to be paid for. [Which means that R. Assi's view cannot stand since in civil law we follow the ruling of Samuel?] ');">⁷</span> — Samuel might say to you that we are dealing here with a case where e.g., both the wool and the dye belonged to the owner, so that the dyer had to be paid only for the labour of his hands.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In which case the craftsman acquires no title to the increase in value, since the dye which imparts to the wool the increased value is not his. ');">⁸</span>

Explore commentary for Bava Kamma 197:4. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.