Bava Kamma 118B

מאי טעמא דרב חסדא? הואיל ואנקטה נגרי ברייתא.

What is the reasoning of Rav Ḥisda, who holds that the requirement to return the animal with the owner’s knowledge is in the case where the owners did not know about the theft? Since the thief taught the lamb to take steps outside, i.e., to leave the owners’ property, it will now require greater supervision, which the owners can provide only if they are aware of the situation.

ומי אמר רבא הכי? והאמר רבא: האי מאן דחזייה לחבריה דאגבה אימרא מעדרא דידיה, ורמא ביה קלא ושדייה, ולא ידע אי הדרה אי לא הדרה, ומת או נגנב ⁠– חייב באחריותו.

The Talmud assumes that since Rava explained Rav Ḥisda’s reasoning, he accepts Rav Ḥisda’s ruling. The Talmud asks: But did Rava actually say this? Doesn’t Rava say that in the case of this person who saw another lift a lamb from his flock in order to steal it, and the owner then raised his voice at the thief, and the thief discarded it, but the owner did not know if the thief returned the lamb or if he did not return it, and the lamb then died or was stolen, the thief is to pay restitution for it?

מאי, לאו אף על גב דמני? לא, דלא מני.

The Talmud comments: What, is this statement of Rava not applicable even if the owner counted his flock after this incident? Accordingly, Rava rules that if the owner knew about the theft, the thief is rendered exempt from liability only if he returns the lamb with the owner’s knowledge, which is not in accordance with the ruling of Rav Ḥisda. The Talmud answers: No, Rava’s ruling applies only where the owner did not count the flock.

ומי אמר רב הכי? והאמר רב: החזירו לעדר שבמדבר ⁠– יצא! אמר רב חנן בר אבא: מודה רב ברקועתא.

The Talmud examines Rav’s ruling. But did Rav actually say this? Doesn’t Rav say that if the thief returned the lamb to the owner’s flock that is in an unsettled area, he has fulfilled his obligation to return it? This indicates that the thief is exempt from further liability even though the thief did not inform the owner of the lamb’s return and the owner did not count the flock. The Talmud answers that Rav Ḥanan bar Abba said: Rav concedes that the thief is exempt in this case only where the lamb was spotted [birkuata]. Since the lamb’s spots are distinctive, the owner immediately becomes aware of its return.