Commentary for Moed Katan 23:18

דאמר שמואל זופתין כוזתא ואין זופתין חביתא רב דימי מנהרדעא אמר זופתין חביתא ואין זופתין כוזתא מר חייש לפסידא ומר חייש לטירחא

Because, if [the Tanna] had told us the first [clause alone], we might have argued that only in that case did R'Jose say [he may complete the process] as the loss on oil is considerable, whereas in the case of wine, where the loss is not much, one might presume that he concurred with the [stricter] view of R'Judah. And if [the Tanna] had told us the latter [clause alone], we might have argued that only in this case [of wine] did R'Judah say [he may not do more], whereas in that [former case of oil], one might presume that he concurred with thee more [lenient] view of R'Jose: [therefore] it was necessary [to enunciate both clauses].

Explore commentary for Moed Katan 23:18. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.