Reference for Bava Kamma 236:24
ת"ש דתניא ר"י אומר לוקחין בייתות מהן ואין לוקחין מהן מדבריות ובכל מקום לוקחין מהן ארבעה וחמשה צאן
BUT IN ALL THESE CASES, IF IT WAS STIPULATED BY THEM THAT THE GOODS ARE TO BE HIDDEN, IT IS FORBIDDEN [TO BUY THEM]. EGGS AND HENS MAY, HOWEVER, BE BOUGHT IN ALL PLACES. <b><i>GEMARA</i></b>. Our Rabbis taught: It is not right to buy from shepherds either goats or kids or fleeces or torn pieces of wool, though it is allowed to buy from them made-up garments, as these are certainly theirs.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For even if the wool was not theirs ownership was transferred by the change in substance. ');"><sup>36</sup></span> It is Similarly allowed to buy from them milk and cheese in the wilderness<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As they were authorised there to do so. ');"><sup>34</sup></span> though not in inhabited places.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where they are supposed to bring the dairy produce to the proprietors. ');"><sup>37</sup></span> It is [also] allowed to buy from them four or five sheep,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As the absence of so many is too conspicuous and the shepherd would hardly rely upon the allegation of accidental loss occasioned by beasts. ');"><sup>38</sup></span> four or five fleeces, but neither two sheep nor two fleeces. R. Judah Says: Domesticated animals may be bought<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As the proprietor knows the exact number of such animals. ');"><sup>39</sup></span> from them but pasture animals may not be bought from them. The general principle is that anything the absence of which, if it is sold by the shepherd, would be noticed by the proprietor, may be bought from the former, but if the proprietor would not notice it, it may not be bought from him.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Tosef. B.K., XI. ');"><sup>40</sup></span> The Master stated: 'It is [also] allowed to buy from them four or five sheep, four or five fleeces.' Seeing that it has been said that four may be bought, is it necessary to mention five? — Said R. Hisda: Four may be bought out of five.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the proportion should be as four to five; MS.M. adds: five may be bought even out of a large herd. ');"><sup>41</sup></span> Some however say that R. Hisda stated that four may be bought out of a small herd and five out of a big herd. But the text itself seems to contain a contradiction. You say: 'Four or five sheep, four or five fleeces', implying that only four or five could be bought but not three, whereas when you read in the concluding clause: 'But not two sheep', is it not implied that three sheep may be bought? — There is no contradiction, as the latter statement refers to fat animals<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In which case the absence of even three will be noticed by the proprietor. ');"><sup>42</sup></span> and the former to lean ones.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where the absence of three might not be noticed. ');"><sup>43</sup></span> 'R. Judah Says: Domesticated animals may be bought from them but pasture animals may not be bought from them.' It was asked: Did R. Judah refer to the opening clause<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., that four or five sheep may be bought. ');"><sup>44</sup></span> in which case his ruling would be the stricter,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The explanation follows presently. ');"><sup>45</sup></span> or perhaps to the concluding clause,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That two may not be bought. ');"><sup>46</sup></span> in which case it would be the more lenient?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The explanation follows presently. ');"><sup>45</sup></span> Did he refer to the opening clause<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., that four or five sheep may be bought. ');"><sup>44</sup></span> and mean to be more stringent, so that when it says, 'it is allowed to buy from them four or five sheep,' the ruling is to be confined to domesticated animals, whereas in the case of pasture animals even four or five should not be bought? Or did he perhaps refer to the concluding clause<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That two may not be bought. ');"><sup>46</sup></span> and mean to be more lenient, so that when it says 'but neither two sheep nor two fleeces', this ruling would apply only to pasture animals, whereas in the case of domesticated animals even two may be bought? — Come and hear: R. Judah Says: Domesticated animals may be bought from them whereas pasture animals may not be bought from them, but in all places four or five sheep may be bought from them.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 710, n. 13. ');"><sup>47</sup></span>