Commentary for Bava Kamma 211:1
בפקדון פסול לעדות
whereas [if this was done] in the case of a deposit he would thereby become disqualified from giving evidence.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 614, n. 7. ');"><sup>1</sup></span> But did Ilfa not say that an oath transfers possession,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As a deposit (falsely) denied by a bailee committing perjury will no less than in the case of conversion no longer remain in the possession of the depositor but is transferred to the responsibility of the bailee who has become subject to the law of robbery. ');"><sup>2</sup></span>
Explore commentary for Bava Kamma 211:1. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.