Bava Metzia 22a

בבא מציעא כ״ב ע״א

Learn Bava Metzia 22a step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Bava Metzia 22a in Gemara Clarity

Topic

Whether יאוש שלא מדעת (unknowing despair) counts: the thief, river and תרומה sources, and the orchard story

Overview

The גמרא is testing whether יאוש שלא מדעת counts as real יאוש. That means an owner who would give up hope, but does not yet know his item is gone. First it finishes a ברייתא saying that what a גנב, a גזלן or the ירדן river takes stays taken. It challenges אביי from the thief case, but רב פפא explains that the 'thief' is an armed bandit whom the owner sees. Next, a ברייתא about a river sweeping beams into another's field seems to prove unknowing despair does not count. The גמרא explains that the owners could rescue the items only with difficulty, so their chasing or not chasing shows their attitude. Then a ברייתא about separating תרומה from someone else's produce seems to show that approval nobody knew about still counts. רבא answers for אביי that the person was already the owner's שליח, as the פסוק 'גם אתם' requires. A story with מר זוטרא in the orchard of מרי בר איסק teaches that 'go to the nicer ones' shows real approval only for a מצוה like תרומה, not when an owner speaks out of embarrassment. The amud ends by starting a new proof about dew on produce and the owner's happiness, which continues on the next amud.

Opening lines

The steps (19)

1. StatementEnd of the ברייתא: what the river takes and gives stays put
2. ChallengeHow can there be giving up hope in a thief case?
3. Resolutionרב פפא: the thief is an armed bandit
4. ChallengeThen the bandit is just a robber
5. ResolutionTwo kinds of robbers
6. ProofProof from the river that swept away beams
7. RejectionThe owners were able to rescue the items
8. ChallengeThe סיפא doesn't fit 'able to rescue'
9. ResolutionAble to rescue, but only with difficulty
10. ProofA ברייתא about separating תרומה from someone else's field
11. QuestionHow we know whether the owner minds
12. ProofThe approval came after the separating
13. Rejectionרבא: the owner had made him a שליח
14. ProofIt must be a שליח, because of the פסוק
15. ResolutionDefining the exact case: the owner appointed a שליח but did not say which produce
16. StatementThe story of the sages in the orchard of מרי בר איסק
17. ChallengeWhy won't מר זוטרא eat now?
18. ResolutionThe rule only works for תרומה, because it is a מצוה
19. ProofNew proof: dew on produce and the owner's happiness