Reference for Bava Kamma 94:21
ואי בעל השור
Does it not mean that the owner of the premises would be exempt<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the absence of permission. ');"><sup>15</sup></span> and<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where permission was granted. ');"><sup>16</sup></span> the owner of the premises would be liable?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [This shows that the responsibility assumed by the owner of the premises extends in regard to damages in general.] ');"><sup>17</sup></span> — I may say that this is not so, it is the owner of the ox who would be exempt<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the absence of permission. ');"><sup>15</sup></span> and the owner of the ox who would be liable.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where permission was granted. ');"><sup>16</sup></span> But if it refers to the owner of the ox,