Commentary for Ketubot 145:4

צריכא דאי אתמר בההיא בההיא קאמר רב משום דליכא תנאה אבל בהא דאיכא תנאה אימא מודי ליה לשמואל

[Both disputes were] necessary. For if it had only had been stated with regard to the latter, it might have been assumed that Rav stated his opinion in that case only because there was a condition, but that in the former case, where there was a condition, he would agree with Shmuel.

Explore commentary for Ketubot 145:4. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.