Makkos 3b

מכות ג׳ ע״ב

Makkot 3b

Learn Makkos 3b step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Makkos 3b in Gemara Clarity

Topic

Loans and שביעית (10-year loans, conditions against שמיטה, the thirty-day rule), followed by rulings of רב about a neck-hole on שבת and wine-colored water in a מקוה.

Overview

This amud opens by finishing שמואל's ruling, which רב יהודה reports in his name: שביעית cancels even a 10-year loan, because the loan will eventually reach 'לא יגש'. רב כהנא challenges this from our משנה about עדים זוממין, who pay only the value of the time and not the whole loan. רבא answers that the משנה is about a loan with a משכון, or one whose documents were handed to בית דין, and שביעית never cancels those. In a second version (איכא דאמרי), שמואל rules the opposite, and the same משנה and the same answer of רבא appear again. Next, שמואל rules that a condition saying 'שביעית will not cancel my loan' does not work. The גמרא explains this by the wording of the condition: a person may give up his own money claim, as with אונאה, but he cannot cancel a law of the תורה. The גמרא then teaches that a loan with no set due date cannot be called in for thirty days, whether it was made with a שטר or by word of mouth. That rule is learned from the extra words 'שנת השמיטה'. Finally come two rulings of רב: one about opening a garment's neck-hole on שבת, and one about wine-colored water falling into a מקוה. Each is challenged and defended, and the discussion of the מקוה continues on the next amud.

Opening lines

The steps (28)

1. StatementThe reason a 10-year loan is still cancelled by שביעית
2. ChallengeChallenge from our משנה: the lying witnesses would owe the whole sum
3. Resolutionרבא: the משנה is about loans שביעית does not cancel
4. ProofSource: the משנה in שביעית that these loans are not cancelled
5. StatementSecond version: שמואל rules a 10-year loan is not cancelled
6. ProofSupport for the second version from our משנה
7. Rejectionרבא rejects the proof: the משנה's loan is one that is never cancelled
8. Proofמשנה source: collateral loans and court-held documents are not cancelled
9. Statementשמואל: a condition that שביעית will not cancel a loan does not work
10. QuestionSuggested reason: a condition against the Torah is void
11. ChallengeChallenge: שמואל allows a condition that waives overcharging
12. Resolutionשמואל's own explanation: it depends on how the condition is worded
13. ConclusionThe same distinction applied to שביעית
14. StatementA loan with no set due date cannot be called in for thirty days
15. Statementרבה בר בר חנה suggests the rule applies only to a loan with a שטר
16. Rejectionרב rejects the limit: both kinds of loan get thirty days
17. ProofA ברייתא supports רב
18. Questionשמואל demands the source of the thirty-day rule
19. ResponseThe extra words 'year of release' teach a second, shorter release
20. StatementOpening a new neck-hole in a garment on שבת
21. ChallengeWhy is this different from piercing a barrel stopper?
22. ResolutionThe neck cloth is part of the garment, the stopper is not
23. StatementWater colored by a drop of wine does not disqualify a מקוה
24. ChallengeWhy is this different from dye water?
25. ResolutionDye water is still 'water,' but this is 'diluted wine'
26. Challengeרבי חייא taught that this water does disqualify the מקוה
27. Resolutionרבא says each ruling follows a different side of an argument
28. Proofרבא begins quoting the משנה where the argument appears