Bava Metzia 16b

בבא מציעא ט״ז ע״ב

Learn Bava Metzia 16b step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Bava Metzia 16b in Gemara Clarity

Topic

Selling what you don't own yet (רב and רבי מאיר), and whether found loan documents are returned (שמואל vs. רבי יוחנן)

Overview

The amud opens with the last words of an earlier discussion: the רבנן made a sale work out of concern for the seller's livelihood. Then רב rules that a person can sell a field he has not bought yet, and the sale takes effect once he buys it. רבא tries to limit this to 'a field' in general, but the גמרא rejects that limit, because רב follows רבי מאיר, who says a person can transfer something that does not exist yet (דבר שלא בא לעולם). Next, שמואל rules that a found שטר הקנאה is returned to the lender, since we do not worry that it was already paid. רב עמרם tries to prove this from the משנה 'כל מעשה בית דין יחזיר,' but רבי זירא and רבא push the proof away. רבא explains that with seized land, a debtor who paid and did not get the document back caused his own loss, while with a loan note the lender may have held it back. רבי יוחנן then rules that even a court-ratified loan note found in the market is not returned, because we worry it was paid. The גמרא defends this against the same משנה and finally opens a side discussion about a כפרן, which continues on the next amud.

Opening lines

The steps (28)

1. ConclusionEnd of the previous discussion: concern for his livelihood
2. Statementרב: a field you will buy can be transferred now
3. Statementרבא limits רב to an unspecified field
4. RejectionThe גמרא strongly rejects רבא's limit
5. ProofProof: רב follows רבי מאיר on things not yet in existence
6. ProofThe ברייתא: betrothal that can only work later
7. Statementרבי מאיר: she is betrothed
8. ConclusionA specific woman is like 'this field'
9. Statementשמואל: a found שטר הקנאה is returned
10. ResolutionThe worry that he never borrowed doesn't matter
11. ResolutionThe worry that he already paid doesn't matter
12. Proofרב נחמן remembers the public announcement in שמואל's court
13. Proofרב עמרם tries to prove שמואל's ruling from a משנה
14. Rejectionרבי זירא: The משנה speaks of documents that cannot be repaid
15. Challengeרבא: Even seized property can be bought back
16. Rejectionרבא: In the משנה, the borrower caused his own loss
17. RejectionReturning seized land is like a new sale, so the debtor needed a bill of sale
18. QuestionCan the same 'his own fault' reasoning work for a loan document?
19. RejectionThe borrower may not have been able to tear it up
20. StatementEven a court-ratified loan document found in the market is not returned
21. StatementWithout ratification, the note may never have been used
22. ConclusionEven a verified note is not returned, because we worry it was repaid
23. ChallengeChallenge from the משנה about court documents
24. ResolutionThe משנה is about a known denier
25. ChallengeA denier can still pay later
26. Resolutionרבא: the משנה is about foreclosure documents
27. StatementOpening a side topic about a denier
28. Statementרב נחמן: when the court says 'Go, give him'