Babylonian Talmud: Tractate Baba Bathra

Folio 165a

— But the fine shades¹  of slander [were meant].

Rab Judah said in the name of Rab: Most [people are guilty] of robbery,²  a minority of lewdness, and all of slander. 'Of slander'? [How] could one imagine [such a thing]! — But the fine shades of slander¹  [were meant].

RABBAN SIMEON B. GAMALIEL SAID: ALL DEPENDS ON THE USAGE OF THE COUNTRY. And does not the first Tanna hold [the principle of the] 'usage of the country'?³  — R. Ashi⁴  replied: Where⁵  it is the custom [to use] plain [deeds] and one said to [the scribe]. 'Prepare for me a plain deed', and [the latter] prepared for him a folded [one], the objection [is valid].⁶  [Where it] is the custom [to use] folded [deeds] and one said to [the scribe]. 'Prepare for me a folded deed', and [the latter] prepared for him a plain [one, legal] objection [may be raised.⁶  Their dispute relates to a place where [both] plain and folded [deeds] are in use, and he said to [the scribe], 'Prepare for me a plain [deed],' and [the latter] prepared for him a folded [one]. [In such a case],⁷  [one] master⁸  is of the opinion [that legal] objection [may be raised]⁹  and [the other] master¹⁰  is of the opinion [that] it was merely an intimation.¹¹

Abaye said: Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel and R. Simeon and R. Eleazar are of the opinion [that, in such a case,¹²  the instruction] is [regarded as] a mere intimation.¹³  [As to] Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel, [proof may be brought from] what has [just] been said. [As to] R. Simeon? — Because we learnt: R. Simeon said, If his mistake was in her favour, she is betrothed.¹⁴  [As to] R. Eleazar? — Because we learnt: If a woman said [to an agent] 'Receive a bill of divorce on my behalf at¹⁵  such and such a place', and he received it on her behalf at a different place [the divorce is] invalid; but R. Eleazar considers it valid.¹⁶  [for one] master is of the opinion [that by her instruction¹⁷  she expressed her] objection.¹⁸  while [the other] master holds the opinion [that] it was merely an intimation to him of the place.¹⁹

A PLAIN [DEED] THAT BEARS THE SIGNATURE OF ONE WITNESS etc.²⁰  One can well understand why it was necessary [to state]. A FOLDED [ONE] THAT BEARS THE SIGNATURES OF TWO WITNESSES is invalid; [since] it might have been imagined [that] because elsewhere [such evidence is] valid, it is valid here also, it [was necessary] to teach us that it is invalid. [In the case] however, [of] A PLAIN [DEED] THAT BEARS THE SIGNATURE OF ONE WITNESS, [is not this] obvious?²¹  Abaye replied: This was required²²  [for the following]. That even [where, in addition to] the signature of one witness,²³  there is also the oral evidence of another²⁴  [the deed is invalid].

Amemar [once] declared [a deed] valid on the signature of one witness²⁵  and the oral evidence of another.²⁴  Said R. Ashi to Amemar: And what [about] the [view] of Abaye?²⁶  [The other] replied to him: I did not hear [of it], that is to say²⁷  I do not share his view. But, [if so],²⁸  the difficulty

1. Lit., 'dust', i.e., not actual, but hinted, Or implied slander. (Cf. 'Ar. 15b).
2. In trade or industry one commits robbery directly or indirectly by withholding due profits. Full price of labour or full value for money.
3. Surely he does. Wherein then, does R. Simeon b. Gamaliel differ from him?
4. Or, 'Abaye' (Rashal).
5. Lit., 'in the place'.
6. Since the instruction was for the preparation of a deed in accordance with the usage of the country, the scribe's deviation tenders the deed legally invalid.
7. When the scribe did not carry out instructions but did not at the same time also deviate from the established local practice.
8. The first Tanna.
9. Since the scribe did not carry out instructions, the deed is invalid.
10. Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel.
11. Lit., 'he shows him a place', i.e., the instruction was not meant to imply a request for a plain deed only. It was a mere intimation that a plain deed also would be acceptable; but no objection to a folded deed was ever intended. Hence, since it is the usage of the place to write either plain, or folded deeds, the document is legally valid.
12. Where a person was instructed to perform a mission in a certain manner and he carried it out in a more acceptable manner.
13. Cf. previous note but one.
14. Kid. 48b. The case of a man who (through an agent) said to a woman, 'Be thou betrothed to me by a silver denar' and tendered instead a gold denar.
15. Lit., 'from'.
16. Git. 65a.
17. That the document be received at a certain place.
18. To any other place. She objects to having her divorce discussed in any other place but the one she mentioned.
19. Whither she would trouble him to go. Beyond that place he would not be expected to go, but she would, nevertheless, be grateful if he did.
20. V. Rashal, a.l.
21. Surely, the evidence of one witnesses is never sufficient to tender a document valid.
22. Lit., 'it was not required (but)'.
23. Lit., 'one witness in writing'.
24. Lit., 'and one witness by (word of) mouth'.
25. Cf. n. 5.
26. Who maintains that in such a case the deed is invalid.
27. Lit., 'as if to say'.
28. That Abaye's view is not accepted.

in our Mishnah¹  [remains]! — It²  teaches us this: That two [witnesses] on a folded [deed are] like one witness on a plain [one]; as in the latter³  the defect is Biblical,⁴  so also in the former⁵  the defect is Biblical.⁶  [This]⁷  can be proved.⁸  for the members of the College⁹  sent¹⁰  [the following enquiry] to R. Jeremiah:¹¹  [In the case of witnesses] one of whom had signed¹²  [the deed] and the other [confirmed the contents] orally,¹³  are they combined?¹⁴  According to the first Tanna of R. Joshua b. Korha,¹⁵  the question does not arise because, [according to him, independent evidence¹⁶  of two can] not be combined even [in the case where] the two [witnesses] signed the deed,¹⁷  or the two [gave] oral [evidence]. The question, however, arises according to R. Joshua b. Korha.¹⁸  Is the [independent evidence] combined only [in the case where] the two [witnesses] signed the deed¹⁷  or where the two [gave] oral [evidence], but [in the case where] one witness signed¹⁷  and one [testified] orally, [their evidence] is not combined, or [is there], perhaps, no difference? He sent to them [the following reply]: I am not worthy of having [this enquiry] addressed to me; but your disciple is inclined to the opinion¹⁹  that [the witnesses] may be [regarded as] combined.

He²⁰  said unto him:²¹  We learned it²²  thus:²³  for the members of the College sent [the following enquiry] to R. Jeremiah: [In the case of] two [witnesses] who gave evidence, one at one court²⁴  and the other²⁵  at another court,²⁴  may [one] court come to the other and [thus cause the evidence to be] combined? According to the first Tanna of R. Nathan²⁶  the question does not arise, since, [according to him, such evidence²⁷  can] not be combined even where [it was given before] one court. The question, however, arises according to R. Nathan.²⁸  Is [the evidence] combined only [where it was given] at one court, but [if] at two courts [it is] not combined, or [is there], perhaps, no difference? And he sent to them [his reply]; I am not worthy of having [this enquiry] addressed to me, but your disciple is inclined to the opinion²⁹  that [the witnesses may] be [regarded as] combined.

Mar b. Hiyya said: This was [the enquiry] addressed to him: [In the case where] two gave evidence at one²⁸  court, and then they gave evidence at another³⁰  court,³¹  may one [member] of either court come [to the other court] and combine?³²  According to [the view] of R. Nathan,³³  the question does not arise, [for] since witnesses may be combined, is there [any] need [to say that] judges [may be combined]? The question, however, arises according to the first Tanna of R. Nathan.³⁴  [Is it] witnesses only that are not combined but judges are, or is there, perhaps, no difference? He sent to them [in reply]: I am not worthy of having [this enquiry] addressed to me; but your disciple is inclined to the view³⁵  that they may be combined.

Rabina said; Such was [the enquiry] sent to him: [Where] three [judges] sat down to confirm a deed, and one of them died,³⁶  [is it] necessary to write; 'We were in a session³⁷  of three³⁸  and one is [now] no more,³⁹  or not?⁴⁰  He sent to them [in reply]: I am not worthy of having [this enquiry] addressed to me; but your disciple is inclined to the view⁴¹  that it is necessary to write, 'We were in a session of three³⁸  and one is [now] no more'. And on account of this⁴²  R. Jeremiah was re-admitted to the College.⁴³

MISHNAH. [WHEN] IN [A BOND OF INDEBTEDNESS] IT IS WRITTEN. 'A HUNDRED ZUZ WHICH ARE TWENTY⁴⁴  SELA' [THE CREDITOR] RECEIVES ONLY⁴⁵  TWENTY [SELA'].⁴⁶  [IF THE ENTRY WAS]. 'A HUNDRED [ZUZ] WHICH ARE THIRTY [SELA']' HE⁴⁷  RECEIVES ONLY⁴⁵  A MANEH.⁴⁸  [IF THE ENTRY READS], SILVER ZUZ IN WHICH ARE … AND [THE AMOUNT IS] BLOTTED OUT, [IT REPRESENTS] NO LESS THAN TWO. [IF THE ENTRY READS]. 'SILVER SELA'S WHICH ARE…', AND [THE AMOUNT IS] BLOTTED OUT, [IT REPRESENTS] NO LESS THAN TWO. [IF], 'DARICS⁴⁹  WHICH ARE … AND [THE AMOUNT IS] BLOTTED OUT, [IT IS] NO LESS THAN TWO. [IF] ABOVE⁵⁰  A MANEH⁵¹  IS WRITTEN AND BELOW⁵²  TWO HUNDRED,⁵³  [OR IF] TWO HUNDRED⁵³  [ARE WRITTEN] ABOVE AND A MANEH⁵¹  BELOW, ONE IS ALWAYS TO BE GUIDED BY THE LOWER ENTRY.⁵⁴  IF SO,⁵⁵  WHY SHOULD THE UPPER [PORTION AT ALL] BE WRITTEN? — IN CASE A LETTER IN THE LOWER [SECTION] BE RUBBED OFF IT MAY BE INFERRED⁵⁶  FROM THE UPPER [PORTION].

GEMARA. Our Rabbis taught:⁵⁷  'Silver'⁵⁸  [signifies]no less than a silver denar. 'Silver denarii' or 'denarii silver' [signifies] no less than two silver denarii. 'Silver for denarii', [signifies] silver for no less than two gold denarii.⁵⁹

The Master said: '"Silver" [signifies] no less than a silver denar.' Might it not signify⁶⁰  a bar [of silver]? — R. Eleazar replied: [This is a case] where coin was mentioned.⁶¹  Might it not signify⁶⁰  small change? — R. Papa replied: In [the case of] a place where small silver coins are not current.⁶²

Our Rabbis taught: 'Gold'⁶³  [signifies] no less than a golden denar. 'Gold denarii' or 'denarii gold' [signifies] no less than two gold denarii. 'Gold for denarii' [signifies] gold of the value of no less than two silver denarii.⁶⁴

The Master said: "gold" [signifies] no less than a gold denar'. Might it not mean⁶⁰  a bar [of gold]? — R. Eleazar replied: [In the case] where coin was mentioned.⁶⁵

1. Why should it be necessary to teach that a deed is invalid if it bears the signature of one witness only? Cf. supra note 3.
2. Our Mishnah.
3. Lit., 'there'.
4. Cf. Deut. XIX, 15.
5. Lit., 'here'.
6. The Rabbis, that is to say, have imposed Biblical restrictions on the folded deed. Consequently, it is invalid if it contains the signatures of two witnesses only. Should such a document be a bond, the creditor would not be entitled to collect his debt from sold or mortgaged lands. Should it be a bill of divorce, the divorce would be illegal.
7. That the written, and oral evidence respectively of two witnesses is combined.
8. Lit., 'thou shalt know'.
9. Lit., 'friends', 'colleagues'.
10. Cut. edd. add. [H], 'from there', i.e., Palestine. This is to be deleted with some MSS. as the entire incident occurred in Babylon. Cf. Weiss, Dot, III, 108.
11. After he had been excluded from the College. V. supra 23b.
12. Lit.. 'one witness in writing'.
13. Lit., 'and one witness by (word of) mouth'.
14. To form complete legal evidence as if they had both signed the deed.
15. I.e., his opponent. v. supra 32a.
16. As defined ibid.
17. Lit., 'in writing'.
18. Who, in opposition to the view of the first Tanna, regards such evidence as valid.
19. Lit., 'thus the opinion of your disciple inclines'.
20. R. Ashi.
21. Amemar.
22. The version of the enquiry sent to R. Jeremiah.
23. And, consequently. no objection from It. Jeremiah's reply could be raised against Abaye's view that the written and oral evidence of two witnesses cannot be combined.
24. Lit., this'.
25. Lit., 'one'.
26. I.e., his opponent. V. supra 32a, Sanh. 30a.
27. Given by each of the two witnesses at a different time.
28. Who allows the evidence even if each of the witnesses appeared before the court on a different day.
29. Cf. supra, p. 720. n. 11.
30. V. p. 720. n. 16.
31. [MSS. 'And again they gave evidence at another court', v. R. Gersh.]
32. To form a court where, owing to death or some other cause, neither of the two or three courts could obtain a quorum.
33. Cf. supra note 1.
34. Cf., p. 720. n. 18.
35. Cf., loc. cit. n. 11.
36. After the witnesses had attested their signatures. A court before whom signatures arc attested must consist of three judges.
37. Lit., 'sitting'.
38. Judges.
39. In order that the signatures of two judges only shall not appear as a contradiction of the first sentence of the attestation, we were … three'.
40. And, consequently, 'and one is now no more' may be omitted.
41. Cf. supra. 720, n. 11.
42. His modesty, and clear thinking and decision.
43. Cf. loc. cit. n. 3.
44. A sela' containing four zuz, the amount of the sela's should have been not twenty but five and twenty.
45. Lit., 'he has not but'.
46. I.e., eighty zuz. The holder of the deed being the claimant and the other being in the possession of the sum claimed, the former cannot obtain payment unless he produces satisfactory proof that the higher figure in the bond is the correct one. If he cannot do so, it is assumed that the zuzim borrowed were of an inferior quality five of which (instead of the usual four) amount to a sela.
47. The creditor.
48. A hundred zuz. Though, usually, thirty sela are a hundred and twenty zuz, it is assumed (cf. n. 3), that the sela's were of an inferior quality, each of which was worth only three and a third zuz.
49. Cf.[G], a Persian gold, or silver coin.
50. In the upper section of the bond.
51. Hundred zuz.
52. Near the conclusion of the bond where the principal items are briefly repeated.
53. Zuz.
54. Lit., 'all goes after the lowest'.
55. That the entry in the lower section is always regarded as more reliable.
56. Lit., 'learned'.
57. Cur. edd. 'he said', is to be deleted. V. BaH, a.l.
58. I.e., if a bond contains an entry that 'silver' was lent and no amount is specified.
59. 'Silver for denarii', implies that the loan consisted of silver which was worth two gold denarii. V. Gemara, infra.
60. Lit., 'say'.
61. Lit., 'written'.
62. Lit., 'men do not make'.
63. Cf., p. 722. n. 25.
64. Cf. supra. note 1.
65. Lit., 'do not pass'.