For this exercise, we will take to formula for the Mishnah discussed in the last blog post: “Case, Law, Factor”, and apply them to the first Mishnah in Baba Metzia. The first part of the Mishnah reads as follows, with a literal English translation:
שְׁנַיִם אוֹחֲזִין בְּטַלִּית, זֶה אוֹמֵר אֲנִי מְצָאתִיהָ וְזֶה אוֹמֵר אֲנִי מְצָאתִיהָ, זֶה אוֹמֵר כֻּלָּהּ שֶׁלִּי וְזֶה אוֹמֵר כֻּלָּהּ שֶׁלִּי, זֶה יִשָּׁבַע שֶׁאֵין לוֹ בָהּ פָּחוֹת מֵחֶצְיָהּ, וְזֶה יִשָּׁבַע שֶׁאֵין לוֹ בָהּ פָּחוֹת מֵחֶצְיָהּ, וְיַחֲלֹקוּ.
- שְׁנַיִם אוֹחֲזִין בְּטַלִּית, Two are holding a Tallit
- זֶה אוֹמֵר אֲנִי מְצָאתִיהָ וְזֶה אוֹמֵר אֲנִי מְצָאתִיהָ, This one says: “I found it” and that one says: “I found it”
- זֶה אוֹמֵר כֻּלָּהּ שֶׁלִּי וְזֶה אוֹמֵר כֻּלָּהּ שֶׁלִּי, This one says: “It’s all mine” and that one says: “It’s all mine”.
- זֶה יִשָּׁבַע שֶׁאֵין לוֹ בָהּ פָּחוֹת מֵחֶצְיָהּ, וְזֶה יִשָּׁבַע שֶׁאֵין לוֹ בָהּ פָּחוֹת מֵחֶצְיָהּ, This one swears that he does not possess less than half of it, and that one swears that he does not possess less than half of it
- וְיַחֲלֹקוּ. And they split it.
The normal order is to start by identifying the case. Line 1 is obviously describing the case. In order to understand what the case is we need to fill in some of blanks – read between the lines. Where are they that they are holding this Tallit? From the context, and the continuation of the Mishnah, we can surmise that they are standing before the court, with both of them holding the Tallit. Now we come to line 2. This seems to be the continuation of the Case of line 1, namely that the two people who are holding the Tallit both claim that they found it. Then when we come to line 3, and they both claim that it all theirs, we wonder: Is this the same Case, or is it a new Case. In other words, do each of two people holding the Tallit make the claim: “I found it and it’s all mine”? Or perhaps this is two separate cases, where in both cases there are two people holding the Tallit, and in the first case they both claim: “I found it” and in the second case they both claim: “It’s all mine.” Indeed, this is the first discussion in the Gemarah, whether this is one case, where both claim to have found it first, and therefor “It’s all mine” hence the two claims for the same case. The other possibility is that it is two cases, the first one where both claim to have found it, and the second case that both claim to have bought it.
That brings us to the Law: each one takes an oath that “not less than half of it is mine”. As a continuation of the Law, once they take the oath, they split the Tallit.
We see that there is no Factor, no reason given in the Mishnah for the Law. This is the more common form of the Mishnah, that no reason is given. This is where we have to ponder the reason for the Law, and this is very often what the Gemarah will do. In our Mishna here, the Law is complex. One aspect is that they both take an oath. Another aspect is the wording of the oath. And once the oath is completed, the Tallit is split between them. These Factors are all discussed in the Gemarah. This we will discuss at a later date.
What we have seen from here is that when we think of the Mishna in terms of “Case, Law, Factor,” that it helps us to clarify what exactly the Mishna is teaching us. More on this next time.