Study Bava Metzia folio 56B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
With regard to sacrificial animals for which one bears responsibility to replace them, they are subject to the halakhot of exploitation, as this responsibility indicates a certain aspect of ownership. And those for which one does not bear responsibility to replace them, they are not subject to the
Talmud: The Talmud asks: From where are these matters derived? It is as A baraita states: It is written: “And if you sell to your colleague an item that is sold, or acquire from your colleague’s hand, one shall not exploit his brother” (Leviticus 25:14). This is referring to an item acquired from
From here the rabbis said: In the case of one who sells his documents that are no longer in use to a perfumer for use in packaging his wares, they are subject to the halakhot of exploitation because he is selling the paper itself. The Talmud asks: Isn’t this obvious? In that case, one sold paper,
Rabba bar Memel objects to this: Is that to say that anywhere that it is written “his hand,” the reference is to his actual hand, and not merely to his possession, in its metaphorical sense? If that is so, that which is written: “And taken all his land from his hand” (Numbers 21:26), would you a
The Talmud asks: Is that to say that anywhere that it is written “his hand” the reference is not to his actual hand? But isn’t it taught in a baraita: “If the theft is found in his hand” (Exodus 22:3): I have derived from here only his hand; from where do I derive that the halakha is the same if the