Study Bava Kamma folio 95A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Here, the baraita that rules that one may accept the stolen item is referring to a case where the stolen item still exists. There, the baraita that rules not to accept it even if the robber seeks only to fulfill his obligation to Heaven is referring to a case where the stolen item does not still e
The Talmud asks: And is it so that the rabbis did not institute an ordinance for the penitent anywhere that the stolen item still exists? But there is the case of a beam, which is a stolen item that still exists, and we learned in a Mishnah (Gittin 55a): With regard to a stolen beam that the robber
§ The Mishnah teaches: If one robbed another of a pregnant cow, and it then gave birth while in the robber’s possession, or if one robbed another of a ewe that was laden with wool and the robber then sheared it, he pays the owner the value of a cow that is ready to give birth, or the value of a ewe
The Talmud clarifies the different opinions in this baraita. A dilemma was raised before the rabbis: What is the reasoning of R' Meir, who holds that the robber returns the animal and its sheared wool or the animal and its offspring? Is it due to the fact that he holds that despite a change, the c
The Talmud explains: In what case does the reasoning of R' Meir make a practical difference? In a case where the stolen item was devalued since the time of the robbery. If R' Meir’s reason is that despite a change, the changed item remains in its place, it is returned as is, even if its current valu