(49a:1)גט פשוט עדיו מתוכו מקושר עדיו מאחוריו פשוט שכתבו עדיו מאחוריו ומקושר שכתבו עדיו מתוכו שניהם פסולים ר' חנינא בן גמליאל אומר מקושר שכתבו עדיו מתוכו כשר שיכול לעשותו פשוט רבן שמעון בן גמליאל אומר הכל כמנהג המדינה
(49a:1)In an ordinary document, its witnesses are to sign inside it, i.e., on the written side of the paper. In a folded and tied document, its witnesses are to sign on the back of it. With regard to an ordinary document whose witnesses wrote their signatures on the back of it, or a tied document whose witnesses wrote their signatures inside of it, both of these are not valid. Rabbi Ḥanina ben Gamliel says: A tied document whose witnesses wrote their signatures inside of it is valid, because one can transform it into an ordinary document by untying it. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Everything is in accordance with regional custom. If an ordinary document is generally used and one wrote a bound one, or vice versa, the document is invalid.
(49a:2)והוינן בה ותנא קמא לית ליה מנהג המדינה ואמר רב אשי באתרא דנהיגי בפשוט ועבד ליה מקושר א"נ באתרא דנהיגי במקושר ועבד ליה פשוט כולי עלמא לא פליגי דודאי קפידא
(49a:2)And we discussed it: And does the first tanna not accept that one should follow the regional custom? It is not reasonable that he should take issue with such a basic concept. And Rav Ashi says that they have a dispute in a case where one instructed a scribe to write a document for him: If they are in a place where the custom is to write an ordinary document, and he made a tied one for him; alternatively, if they are in a place where the custom is to write a tied document, and he made an ordinary one for him; in both of these cases, everyone agrees that he was certainly particular in his instructions to the agent that he should follow the regional custom, and if the latter deviated from the custom the document is invalid.
(49a:3)כי פליגי באתרא דנהיגי בין בפשוט בין במקושר ואמר ליה עביד לי פשוט ואזל ועבד ליה מקושר מר סבר קפידא ומר סבר מראה מקום הוא לו
(49a:3)The situation in which they disagree is where they are in a place where the custom is to use either an ordinary document or a tied one, and the one requesting the document said to the scribe: Make an ordinary document for me, and the scribe went and made a tied document for him. In such a case, one Sage, the first tanna, holds that the one requesting the document was particular about wanting an ordinary document, and since the scribe wrote a tied document, it is considered to have been written without his consent. And one Sage, Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, holds that the one requesting the document was merely indicating his position to the scribe, stating that if the scribe wanted to save himself the trouble of writing a tied document there would no objection.
(49a:4)ר' אלעזר דתנן האשה שאמרה התקבל לי גיטי ממקום פלוני וקבל לה גיטה ממקום אחר פסול ורבי אלעזר מכשיר אלמא קסבר מראה מקום היא לו
(49a:4)Rabbi Elazar also holds that when one instructs an agent in such a manner he is merely indicating his position to him, as we learned in a mishna (Gittin 65a): If there was a woman who said to her agent: Receive my bill of divorce for me from my husband in such and such a place, and he received her bill of divorce for her elsewhere, it is invalid. And Rabbi Elazar deems it valid. Apparently, he holds that she is merely indicating a place to him where he can receive the bill of divorce, but she does not insist that he accept it in that particular spot.
(49a:5)אמר עולא מחלוקת בשבח ממון אבל בשבח יוחסין דברי הכל אינה מקודשת מאי טעמא מסאנא דרב מכרעאי לא בעינא תניא נמי הכי מודה ר' שמעון אם הטעה לשבח יוחסים אינה מקודשת
(49a:5)§ Ulla says: The dispute in the mishna between the first tanna and Rabbi Shimon is only where he misled her with enhanced monetary value, i.e., he gave her something worth more than the item he had stipulated. But where he misled her with enhanced lineage, so that she was under the impression that his genealogy was less impressive than it in fact is, everyone agrees that she is not betrothed. What is the reason for this? A woman says: I do not desire a shoe that is larger than my foot. She does not wish to marry a man whose social standing is far greater than her own. This is also taught in a baraita (Tosefta 2:6): Rabbi Shimon concedes that if he misled her with enhanced lineage, she is not betrothed.
(49a:6)אמר רב אשי מתניתין נמי דיקא דקתני ע"מ שאני כהן ונמצא לוי לוי ונמצא כהן נתין ונמצא ממזר ממזר ונמצא נתין ולא פליג ר"ש
(49a:6)Rav Ashi says: The wording of the mishna is also precise, as the following mishna (49b) teaches: If one betroths a woman and states that the betrothal is: On the condition that I am a priest, and he was found to be a Levite; or: On the condition that I am a Levite, and he was found to be a priest; or: On the condition that I am a Gibeonite, a people prohibited by rabbinic law from marrying into the congregation, i.e., from marrying a Jew of fit lineage, and he was found to be a mamzer, who is prohibited by Torah law from marrying into the congregation; or: On the condition that I am a mamzer, and he was found to be a Gibeonite, in all of these cases she is not betrothed. And Rabbi Shimon does not disagree with these rulings. This indicates that if one misled a woman with regard to his lineage, Rabbi Shimon concedes that she is not betrothed.
(49a:7)מתקיף לה מר בר רב אשי אלא דקתני ע"מ שיש לי בת או שפחה מגודלת ואין לו על מנת שאין לו ויש לו דשבח ממון הוא הכי נמי דלא פליג
(49a:7)Mar bar Rav Ashi objects to this inference: But what about that which is taught in the same mishna: If one betroths a woman and states that the betrothal is: On the condition that I have a grown daughter or maidservant, and he does not have one; or if one betroths a woman on the condition that he does not have a grown daughter or maidservant and he does have one, the latter of which is an issue of enhanced monetary value, as the difference between one who has a maidservant and one who does not impacts how hard the woman will have to work in the home; in these cases will you also say that Rabbi Shimon does not disagree simply because the mishna does not mention his opinion in that case?
(49a:8)Rather, it must be that he disagrees in the first clause of the mishna with regard to enhanced monetary value, and the same is true with regard to the latter clause, i.e., he also disagrees in that clause, and it was not necessary to state his dispute another time. Here too, with regard to lineage, he disagrees in the first clause, and the same is true with regard to the latter clause.
(49a:9)הכי השתא התם אידי ואידי דשבח ממון פליג ברישא והוא הדין בסיפא הכא דשבח יוחסים הוא אם איתא דפליג נתני
(49a:9)The Gemara rejects this: How can these cases be compared? There, where both this case and that case involve an inaccuracy of enhanced monetary value, it is possible that he disagreed in the first clause and the same is true in the last clause, and the mishna did not need to restate his opinion. But here, where it is a case of enhanced lineage, which is a different issue, if it is so that Rabbi Shimon disagrees, let him teach that explicitly. The fact that no dispute is recorded in the case of enhanced lineage is proof that he concedes in that case.
(49a:10)איבעית אימא הכא נמי שבח יוחסים מי סברת מאי מגודלת גדולה ממש מאי מגודלת גדלת דאמרה היא לא ניחא לי דשקלה מילי מינאי ואזלא נדיא קמי שיבבותיי
(49a:10)If you wish, say instead: Here too, the issue of a daughter or maidservant involves enhanced lineage, not enhanced monetary value. His statement should be understood differently. Do you maintain that what is the meaning of his statement that he has a grown daughter or maidservant; that she is actually grown up, so that she can be of help to his wife? That is not the meaning of his statement. Rather, what is the meaning of: Grown? That she grows and plaits hair, i.e., he has a daughter or maidservant who is a hairdresser. Why might the potential bride view this as a drawback? Because she can say: It is not satisfactory for me to live in the house with a hairdresser, as she will take words she hears from me and will go pass them before my neighbors, meaning she will gossip about me to others. This concern is more akin to a matter of lineage than a matter of monetary value.
(49a:11)תנו רבנן על מנת שאני קריינא כיון שקרא שלשה פסוקים בבית הכנסת הרי זו מקודשת ר' יהודה אומר עד שיקרא ויתרגם יתרגם מדעתיה והתניא ר' יהודה אומר המתרגם פסוק כצורתו הרי זה בדאי והמוסיף עליו הרי זה מחרף ומגדף אלא מאי תרגום תרגום דידן
(49a:11)§ The Sages taught: If one said to a woman: Be betrothed to me on the condition that I am literate with regard to the Torah, once he has read three verses in the synagogue she is betrothed. Rabbi Yehuda says that she is not betrothed until he reads and translates the verses. The Gemara asks: Does Rabbi Yehuda mean that one translates according to his own understanding? But isn’t it taught in a baraita (Tosefta, Megilla 3:21) that Rabbi Yehuda says: One who translates a verse literally is a liar, since he distorts the meaning of the text, and conversely, one who adds his own translation is tantamount to one who curses and blasphemes God? Rather, to which translation is Rabbi Yehuda referring? He is referring to our accepted translation.
(49a:12)והני מילי דא"ל קריינ' אבל אמר לה קרא אנא עד דקרי אורייתא נביאי וכתובי בדיוקא
(49a:12)And this statement applies only if he said to her: I am literate, but if he said to her: I am a reader, this indicates that he is an expert in the reading of the Torah, and she is not betrothed unless he knows how to read the Torah, the Prophets, and the Writings with precision.
(49a:13)על מנת שאני שונה חזקיה אמר הלכות ור' יוחנן אמר תורה
(49a:13)The Gemara discusses a similar case: If one said to a woman: Be betrothed to me on the condition that I study [shoneh], Ḥizkiyya says it means that he studies halakhot, and Rabbi Yoḥanan says it means that he studies Torah, i.e., the written Torah.
(49a:14)מיתיבי איזו היא משנה ר' מאיר אומר הלכות ר' יהודה אומר מדרש
(49a:14)The Gemara raises an objection to Rabbi Yoḥanan from a baraita: What is the meaning of: Mishna? Rabbi Meir says halakhot, Rabbi Yehuda says homiletics. Neither of them, however, says that it refers to the written Torah.
(49b:1)מאי תורה מדרש תורה והני מילי דאמר לה תנינא אבל אמר לה תנא אנא עד דתני הילכתא ספרא וסיפרי ותוספתא
(49b:1)What is the meaning of: Torah, that Rabbi Yoḥanan said? It is homiletic interpretation of the Torah. And this statement applies only if he said to her: I study [taneina]. But if he says to her: I am a tanna [tanna ana], she is not betrothed unless he studies halakha, i.e., Mishna, Sifra and Sifrei, and Tosefta.
(49b:2)ע"מ שאני תלמיד אין אומרים כשמעון בן עזאי וכשמעון בן זומא אלא כל ששואלין אותו בכ"מ דבר אחד בלימודו ואומרו ואפילו במסכתא דכלה על מנת שאני חכם אין אומרים כחכמי יבנה כר' עקיבא וחביריו אלא כל ששואלים אותו דבר חכמה בכל מקום ואומרה
(49b:2)If a man says to a woman: Be betrothed to me on the condition that I am a student of Torah, one does not say that he must be a student who is scholarly like Shimon ben Azzai or like Shimon ben Zoma, who were called students despite their great knowledge, as they were never ordained. Rather, it means anyone who, when he is asked one matter in any topic of his studies, responds appropriately and can say what he has learned, and this suffices even if his statement was in the tractate of Kalla. Similarly, if a man says to a woman: Be betrothed to me on the condition that I am a scholar, one does not say that he must be like the scholars of Yavne, like Rabbi Akiva and his colleagues. Rather, it is referring to anyone who, when he is asked about a matter of wisdom on any topic related to the Torah, responds appropriately and can say what he has learned.
(49b:3)על מנת שאני גבור אין אומרים כאבנר בן נר וכיואב בן צרויה אלא כל שחביריו מתיראים ממנו מפני גבורתו על מנת שאני עשיר אין אומרים כרבי אלעזר בן חרסום וכרבי אלעזר בן עזריה אלא כל שבני עירו מכבדים אותו מפני עושרו
(49b:3)If a man says to a woman: Be betrothed to me on the condition that I am strong, one does not say that he must be as strong as Abner ben Ner, King Saul’s cousin and general, or as strong as Joab ben Zeruiah, King David’s nephew and general. Rather, it means anyone of whom others are afraid due to his strength. If a man says to a woman: Be betrothed to me on the condition that I am wealthy, one does not say he must be as wealthy as Rabbi Elazar ben Ḥarsom or as wealthy as Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya, but rather it can refer to anyone who is honored by the members of his town due to his wealth.
(49b:4)על מנת שאני צדיק אפילו רשע גמור מקודשת שמא הרהר תשובה בדעתו על מנת שאני רשע אפילו צדיק גמור מקודשת שמא הרהר דבר עבודת כוכבים בדעתו
(49b:4)If one says to a woman: Be betrothed to me on the condition that I am a righteous man, then even if he was a completely wicked man she is betrothed, as perhaps in the meantime he had thoughts of repentance in his mind and is now righteous. Similarly, if one says to a woman: Be betrothed to me on the condition that I am a wicked man, then even if he was a completely righteous man she is betrothed, as perhaps he had thoughts of idol worship in his mind, a serious sin that would earn him the label of wicked.
(49b:5)עשרה קבים חכמה ירדו לעולם תשעה נטלה ארץ ישראל ואחד כל העולם כולו עשרה קבים יופי ירדו לעולם תשעה נטלה ירושלים ואחד כל העולם כולו עשרה קבים עשירות ירדו לעולם תשעה נטלו רומיים קדמונים ואחד כל העולם כולו י' קבים עניות ירדו לעולם תשעה נטלה בבל ואחד כל העולם כולו עשרה קבים גסות ירדו לעולם תשעה נטלה עילם ואחד כל העולם כולו
(49b:5)§ Apropos the discussion with regard to various attributes, the Gemara cites a related statement: Ten kav of wisdom descended to the world; Eretz Yisrael took nine of them and all the rest of the world took one. Ten kav of beauty descended to the world; Jerusalem took nine and all the rest of the world in its entirety took one. Ten kav of wealth descended to the world; Rome took nine and all the rest of the world in its entirety took one. Ten kav of poverty descended to the world; Babylonia took nine and all the rest of the world in its entirety took one. Ten kav of arrogance descended to the world; Eilam took nine and all the rest of the world in its entirety took one.
(49b:6)וגסות לבבל לא נחית והכתי' (זכריה ה, ט) ואשא עיני וארא והנה שתים נשים יוצאות ורוח בכנפיהם ולהנה כנפים ככנפי החסידה ותשאנה את האיפה בין הארץ ובין השמים ואומר אל המלאך הדובר בי אנה המה מוליכות את האיפה ויאמר אלי לבנות לה בית בארץ שנער וא"ר יוחנן זו חנופה וגסות הרוח שירדו לבבל
(49b:6)The Gemara asks: But did arrogance not descend to Babylonia? But isn’t it written: “Then I lifted my eyes and saw, and behold there came forth two women, and the wind was in their wings, for they had wings like the wings of a stork. And they lifted up the measure between the earth and the heaven. Then I said to the angel that spoke with me: ‘To where do they take the measure?’ And he said to me: ‘To build her a house in the land of Shinar’” (Zechariah 5:9–11). And Rabbi Yoḥanan says: This refers to flattery and arrogance that descended to Babylonia, i.e., Shinar. This indicates that arrogance reached Babylonia as well.
(49b:7)אין להכא נחית ואשתרבובי הוא דאשתרבובי להתם דיקא נמי דקתני לבנות לה בית ש"מ
(49b:7)The Gemara answers: Yes, it descended to here, to Babylonia, and it made its way to there, to Eilam. The language of the verse is also precise, as it teaches: “To build her a house,” which indicates that the original intention was to build a house in Babylonia, but it was not built there. The Gemara comments: Conclude from it that arrogance did not remain in Babylonia.
(49b:8)איני והאמר מר סימן לגסות עניות ועניות בבבל הוא דאיכא מאי עניות עניות דתורה דכתיב (שיר השירים ח, ח) אחות לנו קטנה ושדים אין לה וא"ר יוחנן זו עילם שזכתה ללמוד ולא זכתה ללמד
(49b:8)The Gemara further asks: Is that so? But didn’t the Master say: A sign of arrogance is poverty, and there is poverty in Babylonia, and not in Eilam. The Gemara answers: To what kind of poverty is this referring? It is poverty with regard to Torah, which was characteristic of Eilam. As it is written: “We have a little sister, and she has no breasts” (Song of Songs 8:8), and Rabbi Yoḥanan said: This refers to Eilam, whose inhabitants merited to learn but did not merit to teach. They did not produce Torah scholars capable of imparting their wisdom to others.
(49b:9)עשרה קבים גבורה ירדו לעולם תשעה נטלו פרסיים וכו' עשרה קבים כנים ירדו לעולם תשעה נטלה מדי כו' עשרה קבים כשפים ירדו לעולם תשעה נטלה מצרים כו' עשרה קבים נגעים ירדו לעולם ט' נטלו חזירים כו' י' קבים זנות ירדו לעולם תשעה נטלה ערביא כו'
(49b:9)The Gemara returns to its list of endowments of various groups: Ten kav of strength descended to the world; the Persians took nine and the rest of the world took one. Ten kav of lice descended to the world; Media took nine and the rest of the world took one. Ten kav of witchcraft descended to the world; Egypt took nine and the rest of the world took one. Ten kav of plagues descended to the world; pigs, which carry disease, took nine and the rest of the world took one. Ten kav of licentiousness descended to the world; Arabia took nine and the rest of the world took one.
(49b:10)עשרה קבים עזות ירדו לעולם תשעה נטלה מישן כו' עשרה קבים שיחה ירדו לעולם תשעה נטלו נשים כו' עשרה קבים שכרות ירדו לעולם תשעה נטלו כושים כו' עשרה קבים שינה ירדו לעולם תשעה נטלו עבדים ואחד נטלו כל העולם כולו
(49b:10)Ten kav of brazenness descended to the world; Meishan, near Babylonia, took nine and the rest of the world took one. Ten kav of conversation descended to the world; women took nine and the rest of the world took one. Ten kav of drunkenness descended to the world; the Kushites took nine and the rest of the world took one. Ten kav of sleep descended to the world; slaves took nine and all the rest of the world in its entirety took one.
(49b:11)מתני׳ ע"מ שאני כהן ונמצא לוי לוי ונמצא כהן נתין ונמצא ממזר ממזר ונמצא נתין בן עיר ונמצא בן כרך בן כרך ונמצא בן עיר על מנת שביתי קרוב למרחץ ונמצא רחוק רחוק ונמצא קרוב
(49b:11)MISHNA: If one said to a woman: Be betrothed to me on the condition that I am a priest, and he was found to be a Levite; or if he said: A Levite, and he was found to be a priest; or if he said: Be betrothed to me on the condition that I am a Gibeonite, a people prohibited by rabbinic law from marrying into the congregation, i.e., from marrying a Jew of fit lineage, and he was found to be a mamzer, who is prohibited by Torah law to marry into the congregation; or he said: A mamzer, and he was found to be a Gibeonite; or if he said: Be betrothed to me on the condition that I am a resident of a small town, and he was found to be a resident of a large city; or he said: A resident of a city, and he was found to be a resident of a town; or if he said: Be betrothed to me on the condition that my house is close to the bathhouse, and it was found to be far; or he said: Far from the bathhouse, and it was found to be close, she is not betrothed.
(49b:12)על מנת שיש לו בת או שפחה מגודלת ואין לו או על מנת שאין לו ויש לו על מנת שאין לו בנים ויש לו או על מנת שיש לו ואין לו ובכולם אע"פ שאמרה בלבי היה להתקדש לו אעפ"כ אינה מקודשת וכן היא שהטעתו
(49b:12)Or if he said that she is betrothed to him on the condition that he has a grown daughter or a maidservant, and he does not have one, or on the condition that he does not have one and he has one; or on the condition that he has no sons, and he has sons, or on the condition that he has sons and he does not have sons, then she is not betrothed. And in all these cases, despite the fact that she later stated: I intended to become betrothed to him nevertheless, whether or not he fulfilled the condition, she is not betrothed. And similarly, if it was she who misled him by making the betrothal conditional upon a statement of hers that turned out to be incorrect, the betrothal will not take effect.
(49b:13)גמ׳ ההוא גברא דזבין לנכסיה אדעתא למיסק לארץ ישראל ובעידנא דזבין לא אמר ולא מידי אמר רבא הוי דברים שבלב ודברים שבלב אינם דברים מנא ליה לרבא הא אילימא מהא דתנן
(49b:13)GEMARA: The Gemara relates: There was a certain man who sold his property with the intention of ascending to Eretz Yisrael, but at the time that he sold the property he did not say anything with regard to his intention. Ultimately, he did not ascend to Eretz Yisrael, and he wished to renege on the sale. Rava said: Since he did not explicitly state that he was selling his property on the condition that he ascend to Eretz Yisrael, that is an unspoken matter that remained in the heart, and unspoken matters that remain in the heart are not significant matters. The Gemara asks: From where does Rava learn this principle? If we say it is from that which we learn in a baraita:
