## Gittin Daf 59a

###### Gittin 59a:1
[Gittin 59a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/59a:1)

אֲנָא הֲוַאי בְּמִנְיָינָא דְּבֵי רַבִּי, וּמִינַּאי דִּידִי מְנוֹ בְּרֵישָׁא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**I was** present **for the counting** of the vote in the court set up **in the school of Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi when they established this ordinance, **and they would start with me first,** asking for my opinion on the matter, although I was the youngest member of the court.


###### Gittin 59a:2
[Gittin 59a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/59a:2)

וְהָאֲנַן תְּנַן: דִּינֵי מָמוֹנוֹת וְהַטְּהָרוֹת וְהַטְּמָאוֹת – מַתְחִילִין מִן הַגָּדוֹל, וְדִינֵי נְפָשׁוֹת מַתְחִילִין מִן הַצַּד!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But didn’t we learn** in the mishna (*Sanhedrin* 32a): In cases of **monetary law and** in cases involving **ritual purities and impurities,** the judges **begin** their deliberations with the opinion of **the most learned** member sitting on the bench, as a demonstration of honor to him. **But in** cases of **capital law,** they **begin** their deliberations with the opinion of the youngest member who sits **on** one of **the side** benches of the court, lest the junior members be unduly influenced by the opinion of their elders, and people come to be wrongfully executed as a result. The matter involving Rav was not a capital case. Why did they begin their deliberations with Rav, who was certainly not the most learned member of the court, as that designation clearly belonged to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi?


###### Gittin 59a:3
[Gittin 59a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/59a:3)

אָמַר רַבָּה בְּרֵיהּ דְּרָבָא, וְאִיתֵּימָא רַבִּי הִילֵּל בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי וָולָס: שָׁאנֵי מִנְיָנָא דְּבֵי רַבִּי, דְּכוּלְּהוּ מִנְיָנַיְיהוּ מִן הַצַּד הֲווֹ מַתְחִילִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Rabba, son of Rava, says, and some say** that it was **Rabbi Hillel, son of Rabbi Volas,** who says: **The counting** of the vote in the court **in the school of Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **was different, as all of their** deliberations and **countings** of the vote **would begin** with the junior members sitting **on the side.** This was because Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi was held in such high esteem that once he expressed his opinion, nobody would be so brazen as to contradict him.


###### Gittin 59a:4
[Gittin 59a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/59a:4)

וְאָמַר רַבָּה בְּרֵיהּ דְּרָבָא, וְאִיתֵּימָא רַבִּי הִילֵּל בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי ווֹלֶס: מִימוֹת מֹשֶׁה וְעַד רַבִּי לֹא מָצִינוּ תּוֹרָה וּגְדוּלָּה בְּמָקוֹם אֶחָד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** apropos of the greatness of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, **Rabba, son of Rava, says, and some say** that it was **Rabbi Hillel, son of Rabbi Volas,** who says: **From the days of Moses and until** the days of **Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **we do not find** unparalleled greatness in **Torah** knowledge **and** unparalleled **greatness** in secular matters, including wealth and high political office, combined **in one place,** i.e., in a single individual.


###### Gittin 59a:5
[Gittin 59a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/59a:5)

וְלָא?! הָא הֲוָה יְהוֹשֻׁעַ! הֲוָה אֶלְעָזָר. הָא הֲוָה אֶלְעָזָר! הֲוָה פִּנְחָס. וְהָא הֲוָה פִּנְחָס! הֲווֹ זְקֵנִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But** was there **not** such a person? **Wasn’t there Joshua,** who was unparalleled in both domains? The Gemara answers: During his day **there was Elazar,** who was Joshua’s equal in Torah knowledge. The Gemara asks: **Wasn’t there Elazar,** who outlived Joshua? The Gemara answers: During his day, **there was Pinehas,** who was Elazar’s equal in Torah knowledge. The Gemara objects: **Wasn’t there Pinehas,** who outlived Elazar? The Gemara answers: **There were the Elders,** who were equal to Pinehas in Torah knowledge.


###### Gittin 59a:6
[Gittin 59a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/59a:6)

הָא הֲוָה שָׁאוּל! הֲוָה שְׁמוּאֵל. וְהָא נָח נַפְשֵׁיהּ! כּוּלְּהוּ שְׁנֵי קָאָמְרִינַן. וְהָא הֲוָה דָּוִד! הֲוָה עִירָא הַיָּאִירִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara further objects: **Wasn’t there Saul,** who was unparalleled in both domains? The Gemara answers: **There was Samuel,** who was Saul’s equal in Torah knowledge. The Gemara asks: **But didn’t** Samuel **pass away** in Saul’s lifetime, leaving Saul the leading figure in both domains? The Gemara answers: **We** meant to **say** that from the days of Moses to the days of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi there was no other single individual who reigned supreme in Torah and greatness for **all the years** that he was the leader of the Jewish people. The Gemara asks: **But wasn’t there David,** who was both the greatest Torah authority and the most powerful temporal authority of his day? The Gemara answers: **There was Ira the Jairite,** who was David’s equal in Torah knowledge.


###### Gittin 59a:7
[Gittin 59a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/59a:7)

וְהָא נָח נַפְשֵׁיהּ! כּוּלְּהוּ שְׁנֵי בָּעֵינַן. הָא הֲוָה שְׁלֹמֹה! הֲוָה שִׁמְעִי בֶּן גֵּרָא. וְהָא קַטְלֵיהּ! כּוּלְּהוּ שְׁנֵי קָאָמְרִינַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara objects: **But didn’t** Ira the Jairite **pass away** in David’s lifetime? The Gemara answers: In order to qualify for this designation, **we require** that he be the leading figure in both Torah and high office for **all the years** that he is the leader of the Jewish people. The Gemara asks: **Wasn’t there Solomon,** who was unparalleled in both domains? The Gemara answers: During his day **there was Shimi ben Gera,** who was Solomon’s master in Torah knowledge. The Gemara objects: **But didn’t** Solomon **kill him** at the beginning of his reign (see I Kings, chapter 2)? The Gemara answers: **We** meant to **say** that from the days of Moses to the days of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi there was no other single individual who reigned supreme in Torah and greatness **all** of his **years.**


###### Gittin 59a:8
[Gittin 59a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/59a:8)

הָא הֲוָה חִזְקִיָּה! הֲוָה שֶׁבְנָא. הָא אִיקְּטִיל! כּוּלְּהוּ שְׁנֵי קָאָמְרִינַן. וְהָא הֲוָה עֶזְרָא! הֲוָה נְחֶמְיָה בֶּן חֲכַלְיָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara further objects: **Wasn’t there Hezekiah,** who was both the leading Torah scholar of his age and also the king of his people? The Gemara answers: **There was Shebnah** in that generation, who was Hezekiah’s equal in Torah knowledge. The Gemara asks: **Wasn’t he killed** in the war against Sennacherib? The Gemara answers: **We** meant to **say** that there was no similar individual who reigned supreme in both Torah and high office **all** of his **years.** The Gemara asks: **But wasn’t there Ezra,** who was the greatest Torah sage of his day and the leader of the Jewish people? The Gemara answers: **There was Nehemiah ben Hacaliah** who was his equal.


###### Gittin 59a:9
[Gittin 59a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/59a:9)

אָמַר רַב אַחָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרָבָא: אַף אֲנִי אוֹמֵר, מִימוֹת רַבִּי וְעַד רַב אָשֵׁי לֹא מָצִינוּ תּוֹרָה וּגְדוּלָּה בְּמָקוֹם אֶחָד. וְלָא?! וְהָא הֲוָה הוּנָא בַּר נָתָן! שָׁאנֵי הוּנָא בַּר נָתָן, דְּמֵיכָף הֲוָה כַּיִיף לֵיהּ לְרַב אָשֵׁי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Aḥa, son of Rava, says: I also say** something similar, that **from the days of Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **and until** the days of **Rav Ashi, we do not find** unparalleled greatness in **Torah** knowledge **and** unparalleled **greatness** in secular matters, including wealth and high political office, combined **in one place,** i.e., in a single individual. The Gemara asks: **But** was there **not** such a person? **But wasn’t there Huna bar Natan,** who enjoyed both great Torah scholarship and great wealth, who lived during the time of Rav Ashi? The Gemara answers: **Huna bar Natan is different, as he** himself **was subordinate to Rav Ashi,** who was his superior in both domains.


###### Gittin 59a:10
[Gittin 59a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/59a:10)

**מַתְנִי׳** חֵרֵשׁ רוֹמֵז וְנִרְמָז. וּבֶן בְּתִירָא אוֹמֵר: קוֹפֵץ וְנִקְפָּץ – בְּמִטַּלְטְלִין. הַפָּעוֹטוֹת מִקָּחָן מִקָּח וּמִמְכָּרָן מִמְכָּר – בְּמִטַּלְטְלִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** The following enactments were also made for the betterment of the world: **A deaf-mute may express** his wishes **through gestures [*romez*];** that is to say, he can signal that he wishes to buy or sell a certain item, and the purchase or sale is valid. **And** similarly **he may respond** to others **through gestures;** that is to say, he can signal that he agrees to a transaction initiated by another party, and the transaction is valid. **And ben Beteira says:** Signals are not necessary, as even if **he expresses** his wishes to buy or sell **through lip movements [*kofetz*] or responds** to others **through lip movements,** the transaction is valid. These *halakhot* apply **to** transactions involving **movable property.** It was similarly enacted that **a purchase** made **by young children [*paotot*]** is a valid **purchase, and a sale** made by them is a valid **sale.** These *halakhot* apply **to** transactions involving **movable property.**


###### Gittin 59a:11
[Gittin 59a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/59a:11)

**גְּמָ׳** אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן: מַחֲלוֹקֶת בְּמִטַּלְטְלִין, אֲבָל בְּגִיטִּין – דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל בִּרְמִיזָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** **Rav Naḥman says** in clarification of the scope of the dispute between the first *tanna* and ben Beteira: The **dispute** is only **with regard to** the purchase or sale of **movable property. But with regard to bills of divorce, all agree,** even ben Beteira, that a deaf-mute can communicate only **through gestures** and not through lip movements.


###### Gittin 59a:12
[Gittin 59a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/59a:12)

פְּשִׁיטָא, ״בְּמִטַּלְטְלִין״ תְּנַן! מַהוּ דְּתֵימָא ״אַף בְּמִטַּלְטְלִין״, קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: It **is obvious** that this is the case, as **didn’t we learn** in the mishna: These *halakhot* apply **to** transactions involving **movable property?** The Gemara answers: Rav Naḥman’s statement is necessary, **lest you say** that the mishna means that these *halakhot* apply **even** to transactions involving **movable property,** and they similarly apply to other matters, such as bills of divorce. Therefore, Rav Naḥman **teaches us** that ben Beteira’s validation of lip movements applies only to transactions involving movable property, but not to bills of divorce.


###### Gittin 59a:13
[Gittin 59a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/59a:13)

אִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי, אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן: כְּמַחְלוֹקֶת בְּמִטַּלְטְלִין כָּךְ מַחְלוֹקֶת בְּגִיטִּין. וְהָאֲנַן ״בְּמִטַּלְטְלִין״ תְּנַן! אֵימָא: ״אַף בְּמִטַּלְטְלִין״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**There are** those **who say** an alternative version of the previous passage, that **Rav Naḥman says** as follows: **Just as** there is **a dispute** between the first *tanna* and ben Beteira **with regard to** transactions involving **movable property, so too,** there is **a dispute with regard to bills of divorce.** The Gemara objects: **But didn’t we learn** in the mishna: These *halakhot* apply **to** transactions involving **movable property?** The Gemara answers: **Say** that the mishna means as follows: These *halakhot* apply **even to** transactions involving **movable property,** and similarly they apply to other matters, such as bills of divorce.


###### Gittin 59a:14
[Gittin 59a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/59a:14)

הַפָּעוֹטוֹת מִקָּחָן מִקָּח וּמִמְכָּרָן מִמְכָּר – בְּמִטַּלְטְלִין. וְעַד כַּמָּה? מַחְוֵי רַב יְהוּדָה לְרַב יִצְחָק בְּרֵיהּ: כְּבַר שֵׁית – כְּבָר שַׁב. רַב כָּהֲנָא אָמַר: כְּבַר שַׁב – כְּבַר תַּמְנֵי. בְּמַתְנִיתָא תָּנָא: כְּבַר תֵּשַׁע – כְּבַר עֶשֶׂר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches that **a purchase** made **by young children** is a valid **purchase, and a sale** made by them is a valid **sale.** These *halakhot* apply **to** transactions involving **movable property.** The Gemara asks: **And from what** age are children included in this enactment? **Rav Yehuda pointed to Rav Yitzḥak, his son:** From the age of **about six or seven. Rav Kahana said:** From the age of **about seven or eight. It was taught in a *baraita*:** From the age of **about nine or ten.**


###### Gittin 59a:15
[Gittin 59a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/59a:15)

וְלָא פְּלִיגִי; כֹּל חַד וְחַד לְפִי חוּרְפֵּיהּ. וְטַעְמָא מַאי? אָמַר רַבִּי אַבָּא בַּר יַעֲקֹב אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: מִשּׁוּם כְּדֵי חַיָּיו.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara comments: **And they do not disagree** about the issue itself; rather, **each** child is evaluated **according to his sharpness.** Some children are gifted and understand the nature of business transactions from an earlier age, while others are slower and do not reach the requisite understanding until they are older. The Gemara asks: **What is the reason** that the Sages instituted this enactment for young children? **Rabbi Abba bar Ya’akov says** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan says: In order to provide for** the child’s **livelihood,** as there may be times a child will have no other way to support himself but to engage in some type of business. If his transactions are not valid, he will go hungry.


###### Gittin 59a:16
[Gittin 59a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/59a:16)

״וַיֹּאמֶר לַאֲשֶׁר עַל הַמֶּלְתָּחָה, הוֹצֵא לְבוּשׁ לְכֹל עוֹבְדֵי הַבָּעַל״ – מַאי ״מֶלְתָּחָה״? אָמַר רַבִּי אַבָּא בַּר יַעֲקֹב אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: דְּבַר הַנִּמְלָל וְנִמְתָּח.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Having cited a tradition reported by Rabbi Abba bar Ya’akov, the Gemara cites another such statement with regard to a different matter: The verse states: **“And he said to him who was over the wardrobe [*meltaḥa*]: Bring forth garments for all the worshippers of the Ba’al”** (II Kings 10:22). **What** is the meaning of the word **“*meltaḥa*”? Rabbi Abba bar Ya’akov says** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan says:** It is **something that can be compressed and** then **stretched [*nimlal venimtaḥ*]** back to its former size; i.e., a certain type of garment that can be folded up so that it is very small, and afterward unfolded so that it is very large.


###### Gittin 59a:17
[Gittin 59a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/59a:17)

כִּי אֲתָא רַב דִּימִי אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: שִׁיגֵּר לוֹ בּוּנְיָים בֶּן נוּנְיָים לְרַבִּי – סִיבְנִי, וְחוֹמֶס, סַלְסָלָה, וּמַלְמָלָא. סִיבְנִי וְחוֹמֶס – כְּאַמְגּוּזָא וּפַלְגֵיהּ דְּאַמְגּוּזָא. סַלְסָלָה וּמַלְמָלָא – כְּפִיסְתְּקָא וּפַלְגוּ דְּפִיסְתְּקָא. מַאי מַלְמָלָא? דָּבָר הַנִּמְלָל וְנִמְתָּח.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**When Rav Dimi came** from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said that **Rabbi Yoḥanan says:** A wealthy man named **Bonyam ben Nunyam** once **sent Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi a gift comprised of the following items: ***Sivni* and *ḥoms*, *salsela* and *malmala*,** which were all special types of linen. The Gemara explains what was unique about each of these fabrics: When folded, the ***sivni* and *ḥoms*** could be compressed to the size, respectively, **of a nut and half a nut.** When the ***salsela* and *malmala*** were folded, they could be compressed to the size, respectively, **of a pistachio nut and half a pistachio nut.** These fabrics were so thin that they could be compressed to a small size, but when they were unfolded they were large enough to cover Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s body. The Gemara explains further: **What** is the meaning of the term ***malmala*?** It is **something that can be compressed and stretched.**


###### Gittin 59a:18
[Gittin 59a:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/59a:18)

וְטָעוּתָן עַד כַּמָּה? אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹנָה אָמַר רַבִּי זֵירָא: עַד שְׁתוּת כְּגָדוֹל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara returns to examine the matter of the transactions of young children and asks: **And up to how much is their mistake?** What is the maximum amount a child can underpay or overcharge without the mistake canceling the sale? **Rabbi Yona says** that **Rabbi Zeira says: Up to one-sixth** of the article’s value, **like** the mistake of **an adult.** If the buyer or seller underpaid or overcharged up to one-sixth of the article’s true value, the wronged party can demand reimbursement. If the error in price was greater than one-sixth, the transaction is annulled.


###### Gittin 59a:19
[Gittin 59a:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/59a:19)

בָּעֵי אַבָּיֵי: מַתְּנָתוֹ, מַאי? רַב יֵימַר אֲמַר: אֵין מַתְּנָתוֹ מַתָּנָה; מָר בַּר רַב אָשֵׁי אָמַר: מַתְּנָתוֹ מַתָּנָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye raises a dilemma: What** is the *halakha* with regard to a young child’s **gift? Rav Yeimar says: His gift is not** a valid **gift. Mar bar Rav Ashi says: His gift is** a valid **gift.**


###### Gittin 59a:20
[Gittin 59a:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/59a:20)

אַפְכוּהָ וְשַׁדְּרוּהָ לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב מׇרְדֳּכַי. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: זִילוּ אֱמַרוּ לְבַר מָר, לָאו הָכִי הֲוָה עוֹבָדָא? כִּי הֲוָה קָאֵי מָר – חַד כַּרְעֵיהּ אַאַרְעָא וְחַד כַּרְעֵיהּ אַדַּרְגָּא, וַאֲמַרְנָא לֵיהּ: מַתְּנָתוֹ מַאי? וַאֲמַר לַן: מַתְּנָתוֹ מַתָּנָה – אַחַת מַתְּנַת שְׁכִיב מְרַע וְאַחַת מַתְּנַת בָּרִיא, אַחַת מַתָּנָה מְרוּבָּה וְאַחַת מַתָּנָה מוּעֶטֶת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Sages **reversed** the attributions of these two statements **and sent** word of this dispute **to Rav Mordekhai,** leading him to understand that it was Mar bar Rav Ashi who said that the child’s gift is not valid. Rav Mordekhai **said to them: Go say to** Mar **son of my Master,** Rav Ashi: **Wasn’t the incident as follows? When the Master,** Rav Ashi, **was standing** with **one foot on the ground and one foot on the step, we said to him: What** is the *halakha* with regard to a young child’s **gift? And he said to us: His gift is** a valid **gift, whether** it is the **gift of a person on his deathbed,** who gives instructions before his death concerning the disposal of his property, **or** it is **the gift of a healthy person, whether** it is **a large gift or** it is **a small gift.** In all cases the gift is valid.


###### Gittin 59a:21
[Gittin 59a:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/59a:21)

**מַתְנִי׳** אֵלּוּ דְּבָרִים אָמְרוּ מִפְּנֵי דַּרְכֵי שָׁלוֹם: כֹּהֵן קוֹרֵא רִאשׁוֹן, וְאַחֲרָיו לֵוִי וְאַחֲרָיו יִשְׂרָאֵל – מִפְּנֵי דַּרְכֵי שָׁלוֹם. מְעָרְבִין בְּבַיִת יָשָׁן – מִפְּנֵי דַּרְכֵי שָׁלוֹם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** Having mentioned a series of enactments instituted by the Sages for the sake of the betterment of the world, the Gemara continues: **These are the matters** that the Sages **instituted on account of the ways of peace,** i.e., to foster peace and prevent strife and controversy: At public readings of the Torah, **a priest reads first, and after him a Levite, and after him an Israelite.** The Sages instituted this order **on account of the ways of peace,** so that people should not quarrel about who is the most distinguished member of the community. Similarly, the Sages enacted that **a joining** of courtyards **is placed in an old house** where it had regularly been placed **on account of the ways of peace,** as will be explained in the Gemara.