Bava Batra 160b (קס:) — the Talmud in English

Fields shall be purchased with money, and written in a document" -

This is a

document

simple

that is like a book. "

And signed" -

This is a

document

folded, since the meaning of “signed” is that it is bundled, signed, and folded. "

And the witness" -

means

two

two witnesses. Since an unspecified witness in the Torah refers to two witnesses. "

Witnesses" - means

three

witnesses.

How so?

Two

witnesses -

for a simple document! Three -

for a folded document!

The Gemara asks:

But perhaps I should reverse it!?

What indication do we have to expound it in this manner and not the reverse—that a simple document requires three witnesses, whereas a folded document requires only two!?

The Gemara answers: It is reasonable to say that the folded document requires more witnesses than the simple one, since

because it has been increased in its folds,

as we see that the verse imposed greater stringency upon it and required the trouble of making folds in it,

it has been increased

also

in its witnesses,

so that it requires more witnesses.

Rafram said: From here

we learn the laws of the various documents, as it is written [Jeremiah 32:11], when Jeremiah purchased the field from Hanamel, his cousin: "

And I took the document of purchase, the sealed one containing the terms and the statutes, and the open one."

And we expound: "

And I took the document of purchase" -

this is a

document

simple. "

The sealed one" -

this is a

document

folded. "

And the open one" -

This is the simple part within the folded document.

The standard text of the document, written in the ordinary manner, "

containing the terms and the statutes,"

indicates that there are differences in the laws between the two types of documents,

these are matters that distinguish between

a document

simple and a folded one.

How so,

in what way do they differ?

This

simple document:

its witnesses are two.

And this

folded document:

its witnesses are three.

This

simple document:

its witnesses sign within it.

And this

folded document:

its witnesses sign on its back.

The Gemara asks:

But perhaps I should reverse it!?

That the simple document should have three witnesses, and the folded document two?

The Gemara answers:

Because it has been increased in its folds, it has been increased in its witnesses.

Rami bar Yeḥezkel said: From here

we learn this, as it is written [Deuteronomy 19:15]: "

By the testimony of two witnesses, or by the testimony of three witnesses, shall the matter stand."

If their testimony can stand through two,

if it is possible to adjudicate on the basis of only two witnesses,

why did the verse specify for you

the

“three” in “three”?

To tell you: Two

for a

simple

document,

and three for a folded one.

The Gemara asks:

But perhaps I should reverse it!?

The Gemara answers:

Because it has been increased in its folds, it has been increased in its witnesses.

The Gemara raises an objection:

Did these verses come for this purpose!?

Did all these verses come in order to derive from them the laws of simple and folded documents? Surely

each one and each one came for its own matter,

each verse came to teach its own lesson.

For the first verse is expounded

as it was taught: "

Fields shall be purchased with money, and written in a document and signed."

Jeremiah is teaching sound advice

He gave them sound advice: Let each person write a document concerning his field and preserve it, so that he will not have to find witnesses to establish his ownership when someone later challenges it.

Whereas the second verse, "

And I took the document

of purchase,"

does not come for any exposition, but to teach us that

this is what actually happened,

that Jeremiah indeed took the document of purchase and gave it to Baruch son of Neriah so that he would preserve it for many days.

And the third verse, "

By the testimony of two witnesses, or by the testimony of three witnesses,"

comes

to equate three with two, in the dispute between Rabbi Akiva and the Rabbis

in tractate Makkot 5b. Rabbi Akiva and the other tanna’im, each according to his position, expound that verse there to teach that three witnesses are like two with regard to various laws—for example, if one of the three is found to be a relative or disqualified, the entire testimony is void, as with two witnesses.

The Gemara answers:

Rather, a

document

folded is

rabbinic.

It is a rabbinic enactment, and it is not learned from the verse.

And the verses,

the verses that we expounded above, are only

mere support

for the enactment.

And what is the reason that the Sages enacted the folded document,

why did the Sages actually enact the folded document?

It was a place of priests.

In the place where the bill of divorce folded was enacted, there were many priests,

and they were extremely quick-tempered,

becoming angry with their wives quickly,

and divorcing their wives,

divorcing them immediately in their anger, after which they could no longer take them back, since a priest is forbidden to a divorcee.

And the Sages made an enactment,

and therefore the Sages enacted the bill of divorce folded, whose preparation takes a long time, so that

in the meantime,

while this was happening,

their minds would settle.

They would calm down from their anger and not divorce their wives.

The Gemara asks:

This works for bills of divorce,

for which this reason applies. But as for other

documents, what can be said,

why did the Sages enact a folded document for them?

The Gemara answers:

So that you should not distinguish between bills of divorce and documents.

Therefore, they enacted the folded document for all documents as well.

The Gemara asks:

Where do

the

witnesses sign

on a folded document?

The Gemara cites a dispute among the amora’im concerning this matter:

Rav Huna said: Between fold and fold,

as will be explained below.

And Rav Yirmeya bar Abba said: On the back of the writing,

on the other side of the document, across the folds,

and opposite the writing,

parallel to the writing on the inner side of the document,

on the outside;

there the witnesses sign.

Rami bar Ḥama said to Rav Ḥisda: According to Rav Huna, who said ‘between fold and fold,’ it entered our minds that

we understood that

between fold and fold

means

on the inside,

that the witnesses signed inside the document, on the blank lines, with their signatures located within the folds of the document and not outside them.

And the Gemara raises a difficulty:

But what about that

document

folded that came before Rabbi, and Rabbi said: There is no date in this one!

The date was missing from this document.

Rabbi Shimon, Rabbi’s son, said to Rabbi,

Rabbi Shimon, Rabbi’s son, replied to him:

Perhaps the date is embedded between its folds,

and that is why you do not see it.

He opened it,

Rabbi untied the folds,

and saw it,

and saw that the date was indeed written there.

And if it is so

that the witnesses also sign between the folds on the inside, then

“There is no date in this one, and there are no witnesses in this one,”

he should have said

Rabbi should have asked where the witnesses’ signatures were as well, and not only where the date was!

He said to him,

Rav Ḥisda said to him:

Do you think that ‘between fold and fold’

means

on the inside?

No!

That is not the case. Rather,

between fold and fold on the outside,

on the other side of the document.

The Gemara asks:

Let us be concerned that perhaps he forged it and wrote whatever he wanted,

why are we not concerned, with regard to a folded document [which at its end has blank space remaining for the document’s validation by the court, and whose witnesses do not sign at its end but sign on the outside, at its top], that the lender might add at the end of the document, after the witnesses signed on the outside, that the borrower owes him additional money,

and the witnesses signed,

since in a folded document the witnesses’ signatures are not at the end of the document but on its back, between the folds, and how will we know where their testimony ends?

The Gemara answers:

For it is written in it,

as they write at the end of the document, before the witnesses sign on the outside, "

Confirmed and valid."

This proves that the document ends here.

The Gemara raises a difficulty:

Let us be concerned that perhaps he wrote

the lender

whatever he wanted,

after that first “confirmed and valid,”

and then wrote another "

confirmed and valid"

after it,

so that after his addition he would write “confirmed and valid” again?

The Gemara answers: Only

one "

confirmed and valid"

is written. Two "

confirmed and valid"

are not written.

This would prove that it had been forged.

The Gemara raises a difficulty:

But let us be concerned that perhaps he erased the "

confirmed and valid,"

lest the lender erase the “confirmed and valid,”

and wrote whatever he wanted,

adding anything he wished to the document,

and then wrote,

at the end he would write again, "

confirmed and valid"?

The Gemara answers:

Rabbi Yoḥanan already said: An inserted clause that has been validated is valid.

If the scribe made an error and omitted several words, he may add them between the lines, and at the end of the document he validates them by writing that all those words inserted between the lines are “confirmed and valid.”