## Bava Batra Daf 156a

###### Bava Batra 156a:1
[Bava Batra 156a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/156a:1)

וּלְטַעְמָיךְ, זַבֵּין שָׁוֵי חַמְשָׁא – בְּשִׁיתָּא, הָכִי נָמֵי דִּזְבִינֵיהּ זְבִינֵי?!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And according to your reasoning,** that the money he receives in exchange for the property is a reason one could consider his sale valid, if **he sold** property **worth five** dinars **for six** dinars, would **his sale also be** a valid **sale?**


###### Bava Batra 156a:2
[Bava Batra 156a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/156a:2)

אֶלָּא קִים לְהוּ לְרַבָּנַן דְּיָנוֹקָא מְקָרְבָא דַּעְתֵּיהּ גַּבֵּי זוּזֵי; וְאִי אָמְרַתְּ זְבִינֵיהּ זְבִינֵי, זִמְנִין דִּמְקַרְקְשִׁי לֵיהּ זוּזֵי, אָזֵיל מְזַבֵּין לְכוּלְּהוּ נִכְסֵי דַּאֲבוּהּ. אֲבָל גַּבֵּי מַתָּנָה, אִי לָאו דַּהֲוָה לֵיהּ הֲנָאָה מִינֵּיהּ – לָא הֲוָה יָהֵיב לֵיהּ מַתָּנָה; אֲמַרוּ רַבָּנַן: תֶּיהְוֵי מַתְּנָתוֹ מַתָּנָה, דְּלִעְבְּידוּ לְהוּ מִילֵּי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, the Sages maintain that a child’s inclination** is to be **attracted to money. And if you say** that **his sale is** a valid **sale,** there may be **times** that there are potential buyers **who rattle the dinars** before **him** in order to tempt him to sell, and **he will go and sell all of his father’s property.** That is why the Sages ruled that all of his sales are not valid. **But with regard to a gift, if he did not** derive **benefit from** the recipient, **he would not give him a gift. The Sages** therefore **said: Let the gift** of an orphan **be** a valid **gift, so** that people **will perform** beneficial **matters for** the orphans, as the orphan can reciprocate by giving gifts.


###### Bava Batra 156a:3
[Bava Batra 156a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/156a:3)

אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: בּוֹדְקִין לְקִדּוּשִׁין, לְגֵרוּשִׁין, וְלַחֲלִיצָה, וּלְמֵיאוּנִין. וְלִמְכּוֹר בְּנִכְסֵי אָבִיו – עַד שֶׁיְּהֵא בֶּן עֶשְׂרִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Rav Naḥman says** that **Shmuel says:** Children who have reached the age of majority, i.e., a boy who is thirteen years old and a girl who is twelve years old, **are examined** for signs indicating puberty if it is necessary to determine their adulthood **for** the purpose of **betrothal, for** the purpose of **divorce, for** the purpose of ***ḥalitza*, and** for the purpose of stating a girl’s **refusal** to remain married. **But** in order **to sell from the property that** one inherited from **his father,** the seller must be older, and one cannot sell this property **until** the seller **is twenty** years **old.**


###### Bava Batra 156a:4
[Bava Batra 156a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/156a:4)

וְכֵיוָן דִּבְדַקְנָא לְקִדּוּשִׁין, לְגֵרוּשִׁין לְמָה לִי? לֹא נִצְרְכָא אֶלָּא לְיִבּוּם – דִּתְנַן: בֶּן תֵּשַׁע שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד שֶׁבָּא עַל יְבִמְתּוֹ – קְנָאָהּ. וְאֵין נוֹתֵן גֵּט עַד שֶׁיִּגְדַּל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But once I examined** the boy **for** the purpose of **betrothal, why do I** need to examine him again **for** the purpose of **divorce?** The Gemara answers: This **is necessary only with regard to** the **levirate marriage** of a minor, **as we learned** in a mishna (*Nidda* 45a): A boy who is **nine years and one day old who engaged in intercourse with his *yevama*,** i.e., his brother’s widow, **acquired her** as his wife by means of engaging in the act of intercourse. Although a minor cannot betroth a woman under ordinary circumstances, in the case of levirate marriage the act of intercourse of a nine-year-old with his *yevama* effects acquisition. **But he cannot give** her **a bill of divorce until he reaches his majority.** It is therefore necessary to examine him at the time of the divorce.


###### Bava Batra 156a:5
[Bava Batra 156a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/156a:5)

לַחֲלִיצָה – לְאַפּוֹקֵי מִדְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי, דְּאָמַר: ״אִישׁ״ כָּתוּב בַּפָּרָשָׁה, אֲבָל אִשָּׁה – בֵּין גְּדוֹלָה וּבֵין קְטַנָּה; קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן דְּמַקְּשִׁינַן אִשָּׁה לְאִישׁ, דְּלָא כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains why it is necessary to mention examining a boy **for** the purpose of ***ḥalitza*:** This is mentioned **to the exclusion of that which Rabbi Yosei** says, **as** Rabbi Yosei **says: “Man,”** i.e., an adult man, **is written in the** Torah **passage** with regard to *ḥalitza*, as the verse states: “And if the man does not wish to take his brother’s wife” (Deuteronomy 25:7). **But a woman, whether** she is **an adult or a minor,** can be released by *ḥalitza*, as the verse does not indicate her age. To counter this, Rav Naḥman **teaches us that a woman is juxtaposed to a man** in this passage, indicating that the *yevama* must also have reached adulthood, and the *halakha* is **not in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yosei.**


###### Bava Batra 156a:6
[Bava Batra 156a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/156a:6)

וּלְמֵיאוּנִין – לְאַפּוֹקֵי מִדְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה, דְּאָמַר: עַד שֶׁיִּרְבֶּה שָׁחוֹר; קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן דְּלָא כְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains why it is necessary to mention examining a person **for** the purpose of stating her **refusal.** This is mentioned **to the exclusion of that which Rabbi Yehuda** says, **as** Rabbi Yehuda **says** that a girl whose mother or brother married her off while she was a minor can nullify her marriage by refusing to remain married, and she can state this refusal **until** she reaches complete maturity, i.e., **when** the area covered by **black** pubic hairs **is greater** than the skin of the genital area. Rav Naḥman therefore **teaches us that** the *halakha* is **not in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yehuda,** and once a girl has developed two pubic hairs she cannot state her refusal.


###### Bava Batra 156a:7
[Bava Batra 156a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/156a:7)

וְלִמְכּוֹר בְּנִכְסֵי אָבִיו עַד שֶׁיְּהֵא בֶּן עֶשְׂרִים – לְאַפּוֹקֵי מִמַּאן דְּאָמַר בֶּן שְׁמֹנֶה עֶשְׂרֵה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav Naḥman states: **But** in order **to sell from the property that** one inherited from **his father,** the seller must be older, and he cannot sell the property **until he is twenty** years **old.** This is mentioned **to the exclusion of** the opinion of the **one who says** that the seller can be **eighteen** years **old.**


###### Bava Batra 156a:8
[Bava Batra 156a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/156a:8)

וְהִלְכְתָא: תּוֹךְ זְמַן, כְּלִפְנֵי זְמַן. וְהִלְכְתָא כְּגִידֵּל בַּר מְנַשֶּׁה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara concludes: **And the *halakha*** is that with regard to the age when a minor can sell property inherited from his father, **during** the **time,** i.e., during his twentieth year, is considered **as before** the **time** when it is permitted, and he cannot sell until the end of his twentieth year. **And the *halakha*** is **in accordance with** the ruling that Rava sent to **Giddel bar Menashe,** that a child who has reached his majority and understands the nature of business negotiations can sell land.


###### Bava Batra 156a:9
[Bava Batra 156a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/156a:9)

וְהִלְכְתָא כְּמָר זוּטְרָא. וְהִלְכְתָא כְּאַמֵּימָר. וְהִלְכְתָא כְּרַב נַחְמָן אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל – בְּכוּלְּהוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara continues: **And the *halakha*** is **in accordance with** the statement of **Mar Zutra,** that one who is not fit to sell land is also not fit to bear witness with regard to land. **And the *halakha*** is **in accordance with** the statement of **Ameimar,** that an orphan under the age of twenty can bestow gifts from the property he inherited from his father. **And the *halakha*** is **in accordance with** the statement that **Rav Naḥman** says that **Shmuel says with regard to all** the matters that he mentioned.


###### Bava Batra 156a:10
[Bava Batra 156a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Batra/r/156a:10)

**מַתְנִי׳** הַמְחַלֵּק נְכָסָיו עַל פִּיו, רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר: אֶחָד בָּרִיא וְאֶחָד מְסוּכָּן; נְכָסִים שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהֶן אַחְרָיוּת – נִקְנִין בְּכֶסֶף וּבִשְׁטָר וּבַחֲזָקָה, וְשֶׁאֵין לָהֶן אַחְרָיוּת – אֵין נִקְנִין אֶלָּא בִּמְשִׁיכָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** With regard to **one who divides his property** between various recipients **by** means of **verbal** instruction, **Rabbi Elazar says:** Both in the case of **one** who is **healthy and** in the case of **one** who is **dangerously ill,** the *halakha* is as follows: **Property that serves as a guarantee,** i.e., land, **is acquired by** means of **money, by a deed** of transfer, **or by taking possession** of it. **And that** which **does not serve as a guarantee,** i.e., movable property, **can be acquired only by pulling.**