## Bava Metzia Daf 100a

###### Bava Metzia 100a:1
[Bava Metzia 100a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/100a:1)

**מַתְנִי׳** הַמַּחְלִיף פָּרָה בַּחֲמוֹר וְיָלְדָה, וְכֵן הַמּוֹכֵר שִׁפְחָתוֹ וְיָלְדָה, זֶה אוֹמֵר: עַד שֶׁלֹּא מָכַרְתִּי, וְזֶה אוֹמֵר: מִשֶּׁלָּקַחְתִּי – יַחְלוֹקוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** With regard to **one who exchanges a cow for a donkey,** such that by virtue of the cow owner’s act of acquisition on the donkey, the donkey’s erstwhile owner simultaneously acquires the cow, wherever it happens to be located, **and** afterward the cow is found to have **calved; and similarly,** with regard to **one who sells his** Canaanite **maidservant,** with the acquisition effected by the buyer giving him money, **and** afterward **she** is found to have **given birth** to a child, who will be a slave belonging to his mother’s master, at times it is uncertain whether the offspring was born before or after the transaction. If **this** seller **says:** The birth occurred **before I sold** the cow or maidservant, and so the offspring belongs to me, **and that** buyer **says:** The birth occurred **after I purchased** the cow or maidservant, and so the offspring belongs to me, **they divide** the value of the offspring between them.


###### Bava Metzia 100a:2
[Bava Metzia 100a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/100a:2)

הָיוּ לוֹ שְׁנֵי עֲבָדִים, אֶחָד גָּדוֹל וְאֶחָד קָטָן, וְכֵן שְׁתֵּי שָׂדוֹת, אַחַת גְּדוֹלָה וְאַחַת קְטַנָּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna continues: There is a case of **one** who **had two** Canaanite **slaves, one large,** worth more on the slave market, **and one small,** worth less on the slave market, **and similarly, one** who **had two fields, one large and one small.** He sold one of them, and there was a dispute between the buyer and the seller concerning which one was sold.


###### Bava Metzia 100a:3
[Bava Metzia 100a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/100a:3)

הַלּוֹקֵחַ אוֹמֵר: גָּדוֹל לָקַחְתִּי, וְהַלָּה אוֹמֵר: אֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ – זָכָה בַּגָּדוֹל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If **the buyer says: I purchased** the **large** one, **and the other one,** i.e., the seller, **says: I do not know** which I sold; the buyer is **entitled to** take the **large** one.


###### Bava Metzia 100a:4
[Bava Metzia 100a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/100a:4)

הַמּוֹכֵר אוֹמֵר: קָטָן מָכַרְתִּי, וְהַלָּה אוֹמֵר: אֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ – אֵין לוֹ אֶלָּא קָטָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If **the seller says: I sold** the **small** one, **and the other one,** i.e., the buyer, **says: I do not know** which one I purchased; the buyer **is** entitled **to** take **only** the **small** one.


###### Bava Metzia 100a:5
[Bava Metzia 100a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/100a:5)

זֶה אוֹמֵר גָּדוֹל וְזֶה אוֹמֵר קָטָן – יִשָּׁבַע הַמּוֹכֵר שֶׁהַקָּטָן מָכַר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If **this** one **says:** The **large** one was sold, **and that** one **says:** The **small** one was sold, then **the seller takes an oath that** it was **the small** one that **he sold,** and then the buyer takes the small one.


###### Bava Metzia 100a:6
[Bava Metzia 100a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/100a:6)

זֶה אוֹמֵר: אֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ, וְזֶה אוֹמֵר: אֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ – יַחְלוֹקוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If **this** one **says: I do not know** which one was sold, **and that** one **says: I do not know** which one was sold, **they divide** the disputed amount between them.


###### Bava Metzia 100a:7
[Bava Metzia 100a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/100a:7)

**גְּמָ׳** אַמַּאי יַחְלוֹקוּ? וְלִיחְזֵי בִּרְשׁוּת דְּמַאן קָיְימָא, וְלֶהֱוֵי אִידַּךְ הַמּוֹצִיא מֵחֲבֵירוֹ עָלָיו הָרְאָיָה!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The Gemara asks: In the first clause of the mishna, **why do** the two parties **divide** the value of the offspring between them? Instead, **let us see in whose domain** the offspring currently **is.** That person has presumptive ownership of the offspring, **and the other** person **will be** considered to be **the one who is exacting property from another,** and accordingly, the burden of **proof rests upon him.** Since he cannot prove his claim, he is not entitled to take the offspring.


###### Bava Metzia 100a:8
[Bava Metzia 100a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/100a:8)

אָמַר רַב חִיָּיא בַּר אָבִין אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: בְּעוֹמֶדֶת בַּאֲגַם. שִׁפְחָה נָמֵי דְּקָיְימָא בְּסִימְטָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Avin says** that **Shmuel says:** The mishna is referring to a case **where** the calf **is standing in the marsh,** i.e., it is in the domain of neither the buyer nor the seller, and so neither one has presumptive ownership. And with regard to the **maidservant also,** this is a case **where** the child **is** found **in an alley** which does not belong to either the buyer or the seller.


###### Bava Metzia 100a:9
[Bava Metzia 100a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/100a:9)

וְנוֹקְמַהּ אַחֲזָקָה דְּמָרַהּ קַמָּא, וְלִיהְוֵי אִידַּךְ הַמּוֹצִיא מֵחֲבֵירוֹ עָלָיו הָרְאָיָה!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks further: **But** even if the offspring is not in either party’s domain, **establish** it to be **in the presumptive ownership of** its **original owner,** i.e., the seller, as he certainly owned the offspring when it was still a fetus. **And** so **the other** person **will be** considered to be **the one who is exacting property from another,** and accordingly, **the burden of proof rests upon him.** Since he cannot prove his claim, he is not entitled to take the offspring.


###### Bava Metzia 100a:10
[Bava Metzia 100a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/100a:10)

הָא מַנִּי – סוֹמְכוֹס הִיא, דְּאָמַר: מָמוֹן הַמּוּטָּל בְּסָפֵק חוֹלְקִין בְּלֹא שְׁבוּעָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: In accordance with **whose** opinion **is** the ruling of **this** mishna, that the parties divide the value of the offspring equally? It **is** in accordance with the opinion of **Sumakhos, who says:** When there is **property of uncertain ownership,** the parties **divide** it equally **without** the need to take **an oath.**


###### Bava Metzia 100a:11
[Bava Metzia 100a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/100a:11)

אֵימוֹר דְּאָמַר סוֹמְכוֹס בְּשֶׁמָּא וְשֶׁמָּא, בְּבָרִי וּבָרִי מִי אָמַר?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges this: **Say that Sumakhos says** his ruling **when** there is a conflict between **an uncertain** claim **and an uncertain** claim, as each party admits that his claim to the property is uncertain, but **did he say** his ruling **when** there is a conflict between **a certain** claim **and a certain** claim, as each party claims to be certain that the property belongs to him?


###### Bava Metzia 100a:12
[Bava Metzia 100a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/100a:12)

אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר רַב הוּנָא: אִין, אָמַר סוֹמְכוֹס אֲפִילּוּ בְּבָרִי וּבָרִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara offers two opinions concerning the ruling of Sumakhos. **Rabba bar Rav Huna said: Yes, Sumakhos says** his ruling **even when** there is a conflict between **a certain** claim **and a certain** claim.


###### Bava Metzia 100a:13
[Bava Metzia 100a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/100a:13)

רָבָא אָמַר: לְעוֹלָם כִּי אָמַר סוֹמְכוֹס שֶׁמָּא וְשֶׁמָּא, אֲבָל בָּרִי וּבָרִי לָא אָמַר. וּתְנִי: זֶה אוֹמֵר שֶׁמָּא עַד שֶׁלֹּא מָכַרְתִּי, וְזֶה אוֹמֵר שֶׁמָּא מִשֶּׁלָּקַחְתִּי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Another opinion: **Rava said: Actually, when Sumakhos said** his ruling, it applies only where there is a conflict between **an uncertain** claim **and an uncertain** claim, **but** when there is a conflict between **a certain** claim **and a certain** claim, **he did not say** his ruling. And in order that the mishna not pose a difficulty, emend it to refer to uncertain claims and **teach: This** seller **says: Perhaps** the birth occurred **before I sold** the cow or maidservant, **and that** buyer **says: Perhaps** the birth occurred **after I purchased** the cow or maidservant.


###### Bava Metzia 100a:14
[Bava Metzia 100a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/100a:14)

תְּנַן: זֶה אוֹמֵר אֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ וְזֶה אוֹמֵר אֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ – יַחְלוֹקוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges Rabba bar Rav Huna’s opinion: **We learned** in the mishna: If **this** one **says: I do not know** which one was sold, **and that** one **says: I do not know** which one was sold, **they divide** the disputed amount between them.


###### Bava Metzia 100a:15
[Bava Metzia 100a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/100a:15)

בִּשְׁלָמָא לְרָבָא מִדְּסֵיפָא שֶׁמָּא וְשֶׁמָּא – רֵישָׁא נָמֵי שֶׁמָּא וְשֶׁמָּא. אֶלָּא לְרַבָּה בַּר רַב הוּנָא, דְּאָמַר: אִין, אָמַר סוֹמְכוֹס אֲפִילּוּ בָּרִי וּבָרִי, הַשְׁתָּא בָּרִי וּבָרִי אָמַר יַחְלוֹקוּ, שֶׁמָּא וְשֶׁמָּא מִיבַּעְיָא?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Granted, according to** the opinion of **Rava, from** the fact **that the last clause** of the mishna is referring to a case where there is a conflict between **an uncertain** claim **and an uncertain** claim, one can say that **the first clause as well** is referring to a case in which there is a conflict between **an uncertain** claim **and an uncertain** claim. **But according to** the opinion of **Rabba bar Rav Huna, who said: Yes, Sumakhos says** his ruling **even when** there is a conflict between **a certain** claim **and a certain** claim, there is the following difficulty: **Now** that the mishna teaches that even when there is a conflict between **a certain** claim **and a certain** claim Sumakhos **says** that the parties **divide** the disputed amount between them, **is** it **necessary** for the mishna to state that where there is a conflict between **an uncertain** claim **and an uncertain** claim the parties divide the disputed amount between them?


###### Bava Metzia 100a:16
[Bava Metzia 100a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/100a:16)

אִי מִשּׁוּם הָא – לָא אִירְיָא: תְּנָא סֵיפָא לְגַלּוֹיֵי רֵישָׁא, שֶׁלֹּא תֹּאמַר רֵישָׁא שֶׁמָּא וְשֶׁמָּא, אֲבָל בָּרִי וּבָרִי לָא. תְּנָא סֵיפָא: שֶׁמָּא וְשֶׁמָּא, מִכְּלָל דְּרֵישָׁא בָּרִי וּבָרִי, וַאֲפִילּוּ הָכִי יַחְלוֹקוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects the question: **If** the difficulty **is due** only **to that** reason, **there is no** conclusive **argument.** One can say that the mishna **taught the latter clause to shed light on the first clause,** so **that you will not say** that the ruling in **the first clause** applies only where there is a conflict between **an uncertain** claim **and an uncertain** claim, **but** where there is a conflict between **a certain** claim **and a certain** claim the ruling in the first clause does **not** apply, and the disputed amount is not divided. To dispel this notion, the mishna **teaches the last clause,** which is referring to a conflict between **an uncertain** claim **and an uncertain** claim; and then **by inference, the first clause** must refer to a case where there is a conflict between **a certain** claim **and a certain** claim, **and nevertheless,** the parties **divide** the disputed amount between them.


###### Bava Metzia 100a:17
[Bava Metzia 100a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/100a:17)

תְּנַן: זֶה אוֹמֵר גָּדוֹל וְזֶה אוֹמֵר קָטָן – יִשָּׁבַע הַמּוֹכֵר שֶׁקָּטָן מָכַר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara again challenges Rabba bar Rav Huna’s opinion: **We learned** in the mishna: If **this** one **says:** The **large** one was sold, **and that** one **says:** The **small** one was sold, then **the seller takes an oath that** it was **the small** one that **he sold,** and then the buyer takes the small one.


###### Bava Metzia 100a:18
[Bava Metzia 100a:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/100a:18)

בִּשְׁלָמָא לְרָבָא דְּאָמַר: כִּי אָמַר סוֹמְכוֹס שֶׁמָּא וְשֶׁמָּא, אֲבָל בָּרִי וּבָרִי לָא אָמַר – מִשּׁוּם הָכִי יִשָּׁבַע. אֶלָּא לְרַבָּה בַּר רַב הוּנָא דְּאָמַר: אִין, אָמַר סוֹמְכוֹס אֲפִילּוּ בָּרִי וּבָרִי – אַמַּאי יִשָּׁבַע מוֹכֵר? יַחְלוֹקוּ מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Granted, according to** the opinion of **Rava, who said** that **when Sumakhos says** his ruling it applies only where there is a conflict between **an uncertain** claim **and an uncertain** claim, **but** when there is a conflict between **a certain** claim **and a certain** claim **he did not say** his ruling, it is **due to that** reason that in the clause in the mishna in which each party offers a certain claim, the seller **takes an oath. But according to** the opinion of **Rabba bar Rav Huna, who said: Yes, Sumakhos says** his ruling **even** when there is a conflict between **a certain** claim **and a certain** claim, **why** does the mishna rule that the **seller takes an oath;** the mishna **should have** ruled that **they divide** the disputed amount between them.


###### Bava Metzia 100a:19
[Bava Metzia 100a:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/100a:19)

מוֹדֶה סוֹמְכוֹס הֵיכָא דְּאִיכָּא שְׁבוּעָה דְאוֹרָיְיתָא, כִּדְבָעֵינַן לְמֵימַר לְקַמַּן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **Sumakhos concedes** that **where there is** a requirement for one of the parties to take **an oath** required **by Torah law** the disputed amount is not divided, **as we will need to say below** to resolve another challenge to Sumakhos’ opinion.


###### Bava Metzia 100a:20
[Bava Metzia 100a:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/100a:20)

הָיוּ לוֹ שְׁנֵי עֲבָדִים אֶחָד גָּדוֹל וְאֶחָד קָטָן (וְכוּ׳). אַמַּאי יִשָּׁבַע? מַה שֶּׁטְּעָנוֹ לֹא הוֹדָה לוֹ, וּמַה שֶּׁהוֹדָה לוֹ לֹא טְעָנוֹ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: In a case of **one** who **had two** Canaanite **slaves, one large,** worth more on the slave market, **and one small,** worth less on the slave market, and the buyer and seller disagree as to whether it was the large slave or the small slave that was sold, the seller takes an oath that it was the small one that he sold, and then the buyer takes the small one. The Gemara asks: **Why does** the seller **take an oath?** An oath is required only when a defendant admits to part of the claim made against him, but in this case, **that which** the buyer **claimed from** the seller, i.e., the larger slave, the seller **did not admit to** at all, **and that which** the seller **admitted to,** i.e., the smaller slave, the buyer **had not claimed from him.**


###### Bava Metzia 100a:21
[Bava Metzia 100a:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/100a:21)

וְעוֹד: הֵילָךְ הוּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And furthermore,** with regard to the small slave, **this is** a case of: **Here you are.** The seller is not merely admitting that he is liable to give the slave in the future, but allows the buyer to take possession of the slave immediately. As Rav Sheshet explains on 4a, one who offers the disputed item immediately is not considered to be one who admits to part of a claim, and is exempt by Torah law from taking an oath.


###### Bava Metzia 100a:22
[Bava Metzia 100a:22](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/100a:22)

וְעוֹד: אֵין נִשְׁבָּעִין עַל הָעֲבָדִים!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And furthermore, one does not take an oath concerning** a claim about **slaves,** but only concerning claims about movable property. For these three reasons, there should be no requirement to take an oath.


###### Bava Metzia 100a:23
[Bava Metzia 100a:23](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/100a:23)

אָמַר רַב: בְּטוֹעֲנוֹ דָּמִים, דְּמֵי עֶבֶד גָּדוֹל, דְּמֵי עֶבֶד קָטָן. דְּמֵי שָׂדֶה גְּדוֹלָה, דְּמֵי שָׂדֶה קְטַנָּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav said:** The mishna is referring to a case **where** the buyer **claims money** from the seller, not a slave or a field; the buyer claims that he gave the seller **money** equal to the value **of a large slave** and the seller admits to having received **money** equal to the value **of a small slave.** And in the case of the field, the buyer claims that he gave the seller **money** equal to the value **of a large field,** and the seller admits to having received **money** equal to the value **of a small field.**


###### Bava Metzia 100a:24
[Bava Metzia 100a:24](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/100a:24)

וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר: בְּטוֹעֲנוֹ כְּסוּת עֶבֶד גָּדוֹל, כְּסוּת עֶבֶד קָטָן. עוֹמְרֵי שָׂדֶה גְּדוֹלָה, עוֹמְרֵי שָׂדֶה קְטַנָּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Shmuel said:** The mishna is referring to a case **where** the buyer **claims** he purchased **a garment of a large slave,** and the seller admits to having sold him **a garment of a small slave.** And in the case of the field, the buyer claims he purchased the **sheaves** yielded by **a large field,** and the seller admits to having sold him the **sheaves** yielded by **a small field.**