Study Bava Metzia folio 37A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
אף בראשונה, הלכה כמותו או אין הלכה כמותו? אמר ליה: חלוק היה רבי יוסי אף בראשונה, והלכה כמותו אף בראשונה.
even in the first Mishnah in this chapter, and R' 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: R' Yosei was in disagreement even in the first Mishnah in this chapter, and the halakha is in accordance with his opinion even in the first Mishnah.
אתמר נמי. אמר רבי אלעזר: חלוק היה רבי יוסי אף בראשונה, והלכה כמותו אף בראשונה. ורבי יוחנן אמר: מודה היה רבי יוסי בראשונה שכבר שילם.
It was also stated that the amora’im in Eretz Yisrael disagreed about this matter. R' Elazar says: R' Yosei was in disagreement even in the first Mishnah and the halakha is in accordance with his opinion even in the first Mishnah. And R' Yoḥanan says: R' Yosei conceded in the first Mishnah because the bailee already paid and acquired the animal.
שילם – אין, לא שילם – לא? והאמר רבי חייא בר אבא אמר רבי יוחנן: לא ״שילם״ שילם ממש, אלא כיון שאמר ״הריני משלם״ אף על פי שלא שילם. אימא: מודה היה רבי יוסי בראשונה שכבר אמר ״הריני משלם״.
The Talmud questions the formulation of R' Yoḥanan’s statement: If he paid, yes, the thief pays the double payment to him; if he did not pay, no? But doesn’t R' Ḥiyya bar Abba say that R' Yoḥanan himself says: When the Mishnah 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 Talmud answers: Emend the statement of R' Yoḥanan and say: R' Yosei conceded in the first Mishnah because the bailee already said: I hereby choose to pay.