## Bava Metzia Daf 37a

###### Bava Metzia 37a:1
[Bava Metzia 37a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/37a:1)

אַף בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה, הֲלָכָה כְּמוֹתוֹ אוֹ אֵין הֲלָכָה כְּמוֹתוֹ? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: חָלוּק הָיָה רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אַף בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה, וַהֲלָכָה כְּמוֹתוֹ אַף בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**even in the first** mishna in this chapter, and Rabbi Yosei holds that even when a bailee pays for the deposit and chooses not to take an oath, the thief pays the double payment to the owner. Is the ***halakha*** in **accordance with his** opinion even in that case, **or** is the ***halakha* not in accordance with his** opinion? Rav Yehuda **said to him: Rabbi Yosei was in disagreement even in the first** mishna in this chapter, **and the *halakha*** is **in accordance with his** opinion **even in the first** mishna.


###### Bava Metzia 37a:2
[Bava Metzia 37a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/37a:2)

אִתְּמַר נָמֵי. אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: חָלוּק הָיָה רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אַף בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה, וַהֲלָכָה כְּמוֹתוֹ אַף בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה. וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: מוֹדֶה הָיָה רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה שֶׁכְּבָר שִׁילֵּם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**It was also stated** that the *amora’im* in Eretz Yisrael disagreed about this matter. **Rabbi Elazar says: Rabbi Yosei was in disagreement even in the first** mishna **and the *halakha*** is **in accordance with his** opinion **even in the first** mishna. **And Rabbi Yoḥanan says: Rabbi Yosei conceded in the first** mishna **because** the bailee **already paid** and acquired the animal.


###### Bava Metzia 37a:3
[Bava Metzia 37a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/37a:3)

שִׁילֵּם – אִין, לֹא שִׁילֵּם – לָא? וְהָאָמַר רַבִּי חִיָּיא בַּר אַבָּא אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: לֹא ״שִׁילֵּם״ שִׁילֵּם מַמָּשׁ, אֶלָּא כֵּיוָן שֶׁאָמַר ״הֲרֵינִי מְשַׁלֵּם״ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא שִׁילֵּם. אֵימָא: מוֹדֶה הָיָה רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה שֶׁכְּבָר אָמַר ״הֲרֵינִי מְשַׁלֵּם״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara questions the formulation of Rabbi Yoḥanan’s statement: If **he paid, yes,** the thief pays the double payment to him; if **he did not pay, no? But doesn’t Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba say** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan** himself **says:** When the mishna says: If the bailee **paid,** it does **not** mean that he **actually paid; rather, once** the bailee **said: I hereby** choose to **pay, even if he did not** yet actually **pay,** he acquired the double payment? The Gemara answers: Emend the statement of Rabbi Yoḥanan and **say: Rabbi Yosei conceded in the first** mishna **because** the bailee **already said: I hereby** choose to **pay.**


###### Bava Metzia 37a:4
[Bava Metzia 37a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/37a:4)

**מַתְנִי׳** אָמַר לִשְׁנַיִם: גָּזַלְתִּי לְאֶחָד מִכֶּם מָנֶה וְאֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ אֵיזֶה מִכֶּם. אוֹ: אָבִיו שֶׁל אֶחָד מִכֶּם הִפְקִיד לִי מָנֶה וְאֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ אֵיזֶה הוּא – נוֹתֵן לָזֶה מָנֶה וְלָזֶה מָנֶה, שֶׁהוֹדָה מִפִּי עַצְמוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** If **one said to two** people: **I robbed one of you of one hundred dinars, but I do not know** from **which of you** I took the money, **or** if one said to two people: **The father of one of you deposited one hundred dinars with me, but I do not know** the father of **which** of you **he is,** then he **gives one hundred dinars to this** person **and one hundred dinars to that** person. This is **because** there is no way to determine which of them is entitled to the money, and **he admitted** his obligation **at his own** initiative.


###### Bava Metzia 37a:5
[Bava Metzia 37a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/37a:5)

שְׁנַיִם שֶׁהִפְקִידוּ אֵצֶל אֶחָד, זֶה מָנֶה וְזֶה מָאתַיִם. זֶה אוֹמֵר: שֶׁלִּי מָאתַיִם, וְזֶה אוֹמֵר: שֶׁלִּי מָאתַיִם. נוֹתֵן לָזֶה מָנֶה וְלָזֶה מָנֶה, וְהַשְּׁאָר יְהֵא מוּנָּח עַד שֶׁיָּבֹא אֵלִיָּהוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
In the case of **two** people **who deposited** money **with one** person, and **this** one deposited **one hundred dinars and that** one deposited **two hundred** dinars, and when they come to collect their deposit, **this** one **says: My** deposit was **two hundred** dinars, **and that** one **says: My** deposit was **two hundred** dinars, the bailee **gives one hundred dinars to this** one **and one hundred dinars to that** one. **And the rest** of the money, i.e., the contested one hundred dinars, **will be placed** in a safe place **until Elijah comes** and prophetically determines the truth.


###### Bava Metzia 37a:6
[Bava Metzia 37a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/37a:6)

אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי: אִם כֵּן, מָה הִפְסִיד הָרַמַּאי? אֶלָּא הַכֹּל יְהֵא מוּנָּח עַד שֶׁיָּבֹא אֵלִיָּהוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Yosei said: If so, what did the swindler lose?** He lost nothing by claiming the one hundred dinars that belongs to another, and he has no incentive to admit the truth. **Rather, the entire** deposit **will be placed** in a safe place **until Elijah comes. As** his fraud will cause him to lose even the one hundred dinars that he deposited, perhaps he will be discouraged from making a fraudulent claim.


###### Bava Metzia 37a:7
[Bava Metzia 37a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/37a:7)

וְכֵן שְׁנֵי כֵלִים, אֶחָד יָפֶה מָנֶה, וְאֶחָד יָפֶה אֶלֶף זוּז, זֶה אוֹמֵר: יָפֶה שֶׁלִּי, וְזֶה אוֹמֵר: יָפֶה שֶׁלִּי – נוֹתֵן אֶת הַקָּטָן לְאֶחָד מֵהֶן, וּמִתּוֹךְ הַגָּדוֹל נוֹתֵן דְּמֵי קָטָן לַשֵּׁנִי, וְהַשְּׁאָר יְהֵא מוּנָּח עַד שֶׁיָּבֹא אֵלִיָּהוּ. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי: אִם כֵּן מָה הִפְסִיד הָרַמַּאי? אֶלָּא, הַכֹּל יְהֵא מוּנָּח עַד שֶׁיָּבֹא אֵלִיָּהוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And likewise,** if two people deposited **two vessels, one worth one hundred dinars and one worth one thousand dinars,** and **this** one **says: The expensive** vessel **is mine, and that** one **says: The expensive** vessel **is mine,** the bailee **gives the small** vessel **to one of them, and from the** proceeds of the sale of **the large** vessel **he gives the value of the small** vessel **to the other, and the rest** of the money **is placed** in a safe place **until Elijah comes. Rabbi Yosei said: If so, what did the swindler lose? Rather, the entire** deposit, i.e., both vessels, **are placed** in a safe place **until Elijah comes** or one of them admits his deceit.


###### Bava Metzia 37a:8
[Bava Metzia 37a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/37a:8)

**גְּמָ׳** אַלְמָא מִסְּפֵיקָא מַפְּקִינַן מָמוֹנָא, וְלָא אָמְרִינַן: אוֹקֵי מָמוֹנָא בְּחֶזְקַת מָרֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** From the fact that the mishna teaches that if the bailee does not know whom he robbed, he gives one hundred dinars to this one and one hundred dinars to that one, **apparently, in** cases of **uncertainty, we expropriate property** and return it to those claiming it. **And we do not say: Establish the money in the possession of its owner.** In this case, the bailee is currently the owner of the money, but the money is not left in his possession.


###### Bava Metzia 37a:9
[Bava Metzia 37a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/37a:9)

וּרְמִינְהִי: שְׁנַיִם שֶׁהִפְקִידוּ אֵצֶל אֶחָד, זֶה מָנֶה וְזֶה מָאתַיִם, זֶה אוֹמֵר ״שֶׁלִּי מָאתַיִם״ וְזֶה אוֹמֵר ״שֶׁלִּי מָאתַיִם״ – נוֹתֵן לָזֶה מָנֶה וְלָזֶה מָנֶה, וְהַשְּׁאָר יְהֵא מוּנָּח עַד שֶׁיָּבֹא אֵלִיָּהוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And raise a contradiction** from the continuation of the mishna: In the case of **two** people **who deposited** money **with one** person, and **this** one deposited **one hundred dinars and that** one deposited **two hundred** dinars, and when they come to collect their deposit, **this** one **says: My** deposit was **two hundred** dinars, **and that** one **says: My** deposit was **two hundred** dinars, the bailee **gives one hundred dinars to this** one **and one hundred dinars to that** one. **And the rest** of the money **will be placed** in a safe place **until Elijah comes** and prophetically determines the truth.


###### Bava Metzia 37a:10
[Bava Metzia 37a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/37a:10)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: פִּקָּדוֹן אַגָּזֵל קָא רָמֵית, גָּזֵל דַּעֲבַד אִיסּוּרָא – קַנְסוּהּ רַבָּנַן, פִּקָּדוֹן דְּלָא עֲבַד אִיסּוּרָא – לָא קַנְסוּהּ רַבָּנַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Sages **said to** the one who raised the contradiction: **Are you raising a contradiction** between the *halakha* stated in the case of **a deposit and** the *halakha* stated in the case of **a robbery?** In the case of **robbery, where one transgressed a prohibition, the Sages penalized him** and ruled that he must pay both possible robbery victims. In the case of **a deposit, where he did not transgress a prohibition, the Sages did not penalize him.**


###### Bava Metzia 37a:11
[Bava Metzia 37a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/37a:11)

וּרְמִי פִּקָּדוֹן אַפִּקָּדוֹן, וּרְמִי גָּזֵל אַגָּזֵל. פִּקָּדוֹן אַפִּקְדוֹן, דְּקָתָנֵי רֵישָׁא: אוֹ אָבִיו שֶׁל אֶחָד מִכֶּם הִפְקִיד אֶצְלִי מָנֶה, וְאֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ אֵיזֶה הוּא נוֹתֵן לָזֶה מָנֶה וְלָזֶה מָנֶה. וּרְמִינְהִי: שְׁנַיִם שֶׁהִפְקִידוּ וְכוּ׳!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And they raised a contradiction** between the *halakha* stated in the case of **a deposit and** the *halakha* stated in the case of **a deposit, and they raised a contradiction** between the *halakha* stated in the case of **a robbery and** the *halakha* stated in the case of **a robbery.** There is a contradiction between the *halakha* stated in the case of **a deposit and** the *halakha* stated in the case of **a deposit,** as **it is taught** in **the first clause** of the mishna: **Or,** if one said to two people: **The father of one of you deposited one hundred dinars with me, but I do not know** the father of **which** of you **he is,** he **gives one hundred dinars to this** person **and one hundred dinars to that** person. The Gemara **raises a contradiction** from the continuation of the mishna cited above: In the case of **two people who deposited** money with one person, the contested sum is placed in a safe place until Elijah comes.


###### Bava Metzia 37a:12
[Bava Metzia 37a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/37a:12)

אָמַר רָבָא: רֵישָׁא נַעֲשָׂה כְּמִי שֶׁהִפְקִידוּ לוֹ בִּשְׁנֵי כְרִיכוֹת, דַּהֲוָה לֵיהּ לְמֵידַק. סֵיפָא נַעֲשָׂה כְּמִי שֶׁהִפְקִידוּ לוֹ בְּכֶרֶךְ אֶחָד, דְּלָא הֲוָה לֵיהּ לְמֵידַק, כְּגוֹן דְּאַפְקִידוּ תַּרְוַיְיהוּ בַּהֲדֵי הֲדָדֵי בְּחַד זִימְנָא, דְּאָמַר לְהוּ: אַנְתְּ גּוּפַיְיכוּ לָא קָפְדִיתוּ אַהֲדָדֵי, אֲנָא קָפֵידְנָא?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said:** In **the first clause** of the mishna, in the case where the bailee receives money from the father of one person, he **becomes like one with whom they deposited** sums of money in **two** separate **bundles, as the** bailee **should have been discerning** with regard to who gave him the money. His failure to do so constitutes negligence, and therefore he pays the sum to both claimants. In **the latter clause** of the mishna, in the case where he receives money from two people, he **becomes like one with whom they deposited** sums of money in **one bundle, as** there is **no** expectation **that he should have been discerning.** It is a case **where they both deposited** their money **together at one time, as** the bailee **says to them:** If **you yourselves were not suspicious of each other,** should **I be suspicious?** Therefore, he is required to pay them only the sum that they can prove is theirs.


###### Bava Metzia 37a:13
[Bava Metzia 37a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/37a:13)

וּרְמִי גָּזֵל אַגָּזֵל, קָתָנֵי הָכָא: אֲמַר לִשְׁנַיִם גָּזַלְתִּי לְאֶחָד מִכֶּם מָנֶה וְאֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ אֵיזֶה מִכֶּם, אוֹ אָבִיו שֶׁל אֶחָד מִכֶּם הִפְקִיד לִי מָנֶה וְאֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ אֵיזֶה הוּא – נוֹתֵן לָזֶה מָנֶה וְלָזֶה מָנֶה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And they raised a contradiction** between the *halakha* stated in the case of **a robbery and** the *halakha* stated in the case of **a robbery. It is taught here:** If **one said to two** people: **I robbed one of you of one hundred dinars, but I do not know** from **which of you** I took the money, **or** if one said to two people: **The father of one of you deposited one hundred dinars with me, but I do not know** the father of **which** of you **he is,** then **he gives one hundred dinars to this** person **and one hundred dinars to that** person.


###### Bava Metzia 37a:14
[Bava Metzia 37a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/37a:14)

וּרְמִינְהִי: גָּזַל אֶחָד מֵחֲמִשָּׁה, וְאֵינוֹ יוֹדֵעַ אֵיזֶה מֵהֶן גָּזַל, זֶה אוֹמֵר: אוֹתִי גָּזַל, וְזֶה אוֹמֵר: אוֹתִי גָּזַל, מַנִּיחַ גְּזֵילָה בֵּינֵיהֶם וּמִסְתַּלֵּק, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי טַרְפוֹן. אַלְמָא מִסְּפֵקָא לָא מַפְּקִינַן מָמוֹנָא, וְאָמְרִינַן: אוֹקֵים מָמוֹנָא בְּחֶזְקַת מָרֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara **raises a contradiction** from a mishna (*Yevamot* 118b): If one **robbed one of five** people **and he does not know which of them** he robbed, and **this** one **says: He robbed me, and that** one **says: He robbed me,** the robber **places** the **stolen item between them and withdraws** from them; this is **the statement of Rabbi Tarfon. Apparently,** contrary to the mishna, **we do not expropriate property due to an uncertainty** and return it to those claiming it, **and** instead **we say: Establish the money in the possession of its owner.**


###### Bava Metzia 37a:15
[Bava Metzia 37a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/37a:15)

וּמִמַּאי דְּמַתְנִיתִין דְּהָכָא רַבִּי טַרְפוֹן הִיא? דְּקָתָנֵי עֲלַהּ דְּהַהִיא מוֹדֶה רַבִּי טַרְפוֹן בְּאוֹמֵר לִשְׁנַיִם גָּזַלְתִּי לְאֶחָד מִכֶּם מָנֶה וְאֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ אֵיזֶה מִכֶּם שֶׁנּוֹתֵן לָזֶה מָנֶה וְלָזֶה מָנֶה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And from where** is it known **that the mishna here** is in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Tarfon?** Perhaps the mishna is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva, who holds the robber must pay each of the five possible victims, and there is no contradiction at all. The Gemara answers: It is known that the mishna here is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Tarfon, **as it is taught** in a *baraita* **concerning** the *halakha* taught in **that** mishna, in tractate *Yevamot*: **Rabbi Tarfon concedes** that **in** a case where a robber **says to two** people: **I robbed one of you** of **one hundred dinars, but I do not know which of you** it was, **he gives one hundred dinars to this** person **and one hundred dinars to that** person, as he has already admitted his obligation on his own. There is an apparent contradiction between the two statements of Rabbi Tarfon.


###### Bava Metzia 37a:16
[Bava Metzia 37a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/37a:16)

הָתָם דְּקָא תָבְעִי לֵיהּ, הָכָא בְּבָא לָצֵאת יְדֵי שָׁמַיִם. דַּיְקָא נָמֵי דְּקָתָנֵי: שֶׁהוֹדָה מִפִּי עַצְמוֹ. שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **There,** in the mishna where one robbed one of five people of money, it is referring to a case **where** the claimants **demand** payment **from him.** He is required to pay them only one hundred dinars, as the burden of proof rests upon the claimant. By contrast, **here,** i.e., in this mishna and the statement of Rabbi Tarfon in the *baraita*, it is referring to a case **where** the robber **comes to fulfill his obligation to Heaven.** Only by returning the money to the person he robbed can he atone for his transgression. Therefore, he goes beyond the halakhic requirement and pays both claimants. The Gemara notes: The language of this mishna **is also precise, as** the *tanna* **teaches: Because he admitted** his obligation **at his own** initiative. The Gemara affirms: **Learn from** the wording of the mishna that this is the explanation of the mishna.


###### Bava Metzia 37a:17
[Bava Metzia 37a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Metzia/r/37a:17)

אָמַר מָר: הָתָם דְּקָא תָבְעִי לֵיהּ. וְהַלָּה מָה טוֹעֵן? רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב: הַלָּה שׁוֹתֵק. רַב מַתְנָה אָמַר רַב: הַלָּה

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
With regard to returning stolen money, **the Master said: There,** it is referring to a case **where** the claimants **demand** payment **from him.** The Gemara asks: **And the other** person, the thief, **what does he claim** in response? **Rav Yehuda** says that **Rav says: The other** person **is silent,** as he does not know to whom he owes the money. **Rav Mattana** says that **Rav says: The other** person