"and the carcass shall belong to him": to him who sustained the loss. You say this, but perhaps it belongs to him who caused the loss? (This cannot be, for) if so, why need it be mentioned "and the carcass shall belong to him?" (i.e., If he must compensate for the entire loss, then certainly the carcass belongs to him.) (It must be, then, that the carcass belongs to him who sustained the loss) and the intent of the verse is that the value of the carcass is deducted from the total loss (and that amount is restored in addition to the carcass.)