Mesorat%20hashas for Bava Kamma 218:11

אי בכהן טמא דבר שיש לו חלק בו מי אית ליה אלא אתיא לכהן לכהן משדה אחוזה

all the more should he have a title to payment which he has in his own possession? R. Nathan put the argument in a different form: Seeing that a thing in which he had no share until it actually entered his possession cannot be taken from him once it has entered his possession,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [A priest may come and offer his own sacrifice at any time and retain the flesh and skin for himself without sharing it with the priests of the division on duty. Once he however gave it to another priest who hitherto had no title to it, he cannot reclaim it of him.] ');">¹⁶</span> does it not stand to reason that a thing<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Such as payment for a robbery committed upon a proselyte. ');">¹⁷</span>

Explore mesorat%20hashas for Bava Kamma 218:11. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.