Bava Metzia 48a

בבא מציעא מ״ח ע״א

Learn Bava Metzia 48a step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Bava Metzia 48a in Gemara Clarity

Topic

The end of רבי שמעון's ברייתא about backing out of a deal (the curse of 'מי שפרע' and 'אין רוח חכמים נוחה הימנו'), and the start of רבא's proof from a פסוק that supports ריש לקיש: by Torah law, money does not acquire movable items.

Overview

This amud continues the argument between רבי יוחנן and ריש לקיש. רבי יוחנן holds that by Torah law, paying money acquires a movable item. ריש לקיש holds that only pulling the item (משיכה) acquires it. First the גמרא finishes רבי שמעון's ברייתא. Backing out after money was paid brings the curse of 'מי שפרע'. Backing out of a deal made only with words brings only the Sages' displeasure, and רבא confirms that the curse needs money to have been paid. Then רבא proves ריש לקיש's view from a פסוק. The return פסוק in ויקרא never openly names תשומת יד, because a vessel that was never pulled never became the lender's. That proof survives several challenges. Next comes support from a ברייתא. Paying a bathhouse attendant with הקדש money is מעילה right away, but buying an object is not מעילה until it is pulled. A barber who is a גוי is the exception. Finally, the גמרא brings the other side: רב נחמן says money acquires by Torah law, and לוי found a ברייתא where paying a wholesaler with הקדש money is מעילה even without pulling.

Opening lines

The steps (22)

1. StatementPulling the item closes the deal, but backing out after payment brings a curse
2. StatementA deal made only with words
3. Statementרבא explains when the curse applies
4. Proofרבא brings a פסוק to support ריש לקיש
5. Statementרב חסדא explains 'pledge' and 'oppressed'
6. ProofThe return verse skips the pledge because it was never pulled
7. Challengeרב פפא: withheld wages had no pulling either, yet the verse repeats it
8. ResolutionThe withheld wages case is one where the worker took the item and gave it back
9. ChallengeThat would just be a deposit
10. ResolutionThere are two kinds of deposit
11. ChallengeThen the verse could have repeated the pledge the same way
12. ResolutionLeaving out the pledge is what supports ריש לקיש
13. ChallengeDoes the verse really leave out the pledge case?
14. ResolutionAt least it is not written openly
15. QuestionWhere is the proof from a ברייתא?
16. ProofThe bathhouse case and רב's inference
17. ChallengeThe barber case seems to contradict
18. ResolutionThe barber is a גוי
19. ProofA second ברייתא supports the answer
20. ConclusionYes, learn it from here
21. Statementרב נחמן agrees that money acquires by Torah law
22. Proofלוי finds a ברייתא about paying a wholesaler