Commentary for Bava Kamma 36:7
אין מהיכא מייתי לה מקרן מרשות הרבים
Why then not say that according to the Rabbis there could be no such thing as becoming <i>Mu'ad</i> in the case of Pebbles, whereas according to R. Eleazar there may be a case of becoming <i>Mu'ad</i> even in the case of Pebbles? — Raba, however, may say to you: The problem raised by me [as to the possibility of becoming <i>Mu'ad</i>] is of course based on the view of the Rabbis who differ [in this respect] from Symmachus, whereas here [in the case of the dog] both the Rabbis and R. Eleazar may hold the view of Symmachus who maintains that Pebbles always involve payment in full. The reason, however, that the Rabbis order only half damages [to be paid]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the case of the dog. ');"><sup>7</sup></span>
Explore commentary for Bava Kamma 36:7. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.