Bava Metzia 37a

בבא מציעא ל״ז ע״א

Learn Bava Metzia 37a step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Bava Metzia 37a in Gemara Clarity

Topic

Whether רבי יוסי argues in the first משנה of the פרק; then the new משנה about money owed to one of two people, and when a doubt makes someone pay both claimants.

Overview

The amud opens by finishing a question about רבי יוסי. רב יהודה and רבי אלעזר say רבי יוסי argues even in the first משנה of the פרק and that the הלכה follows him there. רבי יוחנן says רבי יוסי agrees there, because the שומר already said 'I will pay.' Then a new משנה begins. A person who admits he robbed one of two people, or holds a deposit from the father of one of them, must pay each of them a full מנה. When two depositors both claim the larger amount, each gets what is surely his, and the rest is set aside until אליהו comes. רבי יוסי says the whole amount is set aside, so the liar loses too. The גמרא resolves the contradictions between these rulings in three ways: a robber is fined for his sin, a שומר pays both only if he should have kept track, and a robber who comes forward on his own to clear himself before Heaven pays everyone. Finally the גמרא asks what the robber says when he is sued. רב יהודה reports that רב said he stays silent, and רב מתנה's different report continues on the next amud.

Opening lines

The steps (25)

1. QuestionIs the halacha like רבי יוסי even in the first case?
2. ResponseYes, he argues there, and the halacha is like him
3. Proofרבי אלעזר says the same thing
4. Statementרבי יוחנן: רבי יוסי agreed in the first case
5. ChallengeBut רבי יוחנן said paying is not needed
6. ResolutionFix the wording: he already said I will pay
7. StatementNew משנה: owing one of two people
8. StatementTwo deposits of 100 and 200, and both claim 200
9. Statementרבי יוסי says everything should be set aside
10. StatementThe same case with two vessels of different value
11. Statementרבי יוסי repeats his view for the vessels
12. StatementThe גמרא learns that in doubt we take money away from where it is
13. ChallengeA contradiction from the two-depositors case
14. ResolutionA robber is fined, a שומר is not
15. ChallengeTwo deposit cases that seem to clash
16. Resolutionרבא: should the שומר have kept track?
17. ChallengeSetting up a contradiction between two robbery rulings
18. Challengeרבי טרפון says the robber only puts the money down between the claimants
19. QuestionHow do we know our משנה follows רבי טרפון?
20. ResponseA ברייתא shows רבי טרפון agrees with our משנה
21. ResolutionBeing sued in court versus coming on his own to clear himself before Heaven
22. ProofThe משנה's wording 'he admitted on his own' supports the answer
23. QuestionIn the demanding case, what does the robber say back?
24. Responseרב יהודה in the name of רב: the robber stays silent
25. Responseרב מתנה begins a different report in the name of רב