Bava Metzia 3a

בבא מציעא ג׳ ע״א

Learn Bava Metzia 3a step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Bava Metzia 3a in Gemara Clarity

Topic

The oath when two hold a טלית, holding back disputed money, and the oath when witnesses prove part of a claim

Overview

The גמרא finishes a קל וחומר showing that סומכוס should not require a שבועה when two people hold a טלית. It answers that the שבועה is only a rabbinic safeguard, as רבי יוחנן explains, so that people will not grab others' garments. Next the גמרא asks whether our משנה fits רבי יוסי or רבנן, who put disputed money aside until אליהו comes in the case of two depositors. It answers that in the depositors' case someone is surely lying, but with the טלית both may have picked it up together. A second answer, about pressuring a cheater to confess, is rejected because it does not fit the buying case. The גמרא then explains the storekeeper case, where both sides swear and collect from the homeowner, because each has his own claim against him. Finally, רבי חייא teaches that when witnesses prove part of a claim, the defendant must swear on the rest. Our משנה supports this, and רבה's reason for the oath of מודה מקצת הטענה begins; it continues on the next amud.

Opening lines

The steps (20)

1. ChallengeFinishing the argument that סומכוס would not require an oath
2. ResolutionThe oath is only a rabbinic safeguard
3. ChallengeDoes our משנה disagree with רבי יוסי?
4. ChallengeEven רבנן seem to disagree with our משנה
5. ResolutionWhy רבנן hold back the depositors' money but split the טלית
6. Challengeרבי יוסי should hold back the טלית all the more
7. ResolutionEven רבי יוסי: here there may be no cheater
8. ResolutionSecond answer: holding back the טלית would not make a cheater confess
9. RejectionThe second answer only works for a found item
10. ConclusionBack to the first answer
11. ChallengeThe storekeeper case: someone is surely lying, yet nothing is held back
12. ResolutionThe storekeeper says: I did your errand, so you pay me
13. ResolutionThe worker also has his own claim against the homeowner
14. ConclusionBoth swear and both collect from the homeowner
15. StatementWitnesses prove half the loan, so he pays half and swears on the rest
16. ProofThe source: witnesses are stronger than his own admission
17. ProofOur משנה of the טלית teaches the same idea
18. QuestionWhy was the comparison to witnesses needed?
19. ResponseWithout it, we might think only admission brings an oath
20. Statementרבה: a borrower won't deny everything to his lender's face