Related%20passage for Bava Metzia 19:4

ואידך תנא סיפא לגלויי רישא סיפא דאמר תחילה רישא דלא אמר תחילה

This also stands to reason! Since the second clause teaches: IF AFTER GIVING IT TO HIM, THAT PERSON SAYS: 'I ACQUIRED IT FIRST,' THERE IS NOTHING IN WHAT HE SAYS, what need is there to state FIRST in this second clause? Surely even if he did not say FIRST [it would be assumed that] he meant 'FIRST'?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When he claims the article after handing it over, he must surely mean that he acquired it first for himself. There would be no sense in his claim that he acquired it for himself after he disposed of it to the rider. ');">⁴</span>

Explore related%20passage for Bava Metzia 19:4. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.