Commentary for Bava Metzia 221:15

אי הכי אפילו עושק נמי דהדר כפריה הכי השתא בשלמא התם כתיב (ויקרא ה, כא) או בגזל מכלל דאודי ליה מעיקרא אבל גבי עושק מי כתיב או בעושק (ויקרא ה, כא) או עשק כתיב שעשקו כבר

If so, may not 'oppression' too refer to subsequent repudiation?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., R. Hisda's definition of oppression may be correct. Privately, he put him off repeatedly, but when sued, denied liability. ');">²⁶</span> — What comparison is there? As for the other [sc. 'robbery'], it is well, for it is written [<i>And lie unto his neighbour</i>]&nbsp;… <i>Or in a thing taken away by violence</i>,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. This implies, the thing having already been taken away by violence, i.e., he refused to settle an admitted liability, he now lies concerning it and denies liability altogether, in accordance with R. Shesheth's amended definition. ');">²⁷</span>

Explore commentary for Bava Metzia 221:15. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.