Bava Batra

one can well understand the reason why they came and asked whether the corpse might be examined.  If, however, it is said, 'At twenty', what useful purpose could the examination serve?  Surely we learnt:  [If at the] age of twenty he  did not produce two hairs,  they  shall bring evidence that he is twenty years old and he [becomes] a saris;  he may neither perform halizah  nor the levirate marriage!  — Has it not been stated in connection with this [Mishnah], 'R. Samuel, son of R. Isaac, said in the name of Rab: That  only [applies to the case] where [other] symptoms of a saris  [also] appeared on his body!'  Raba said: [This; may] also [be arrived at by] deduction. For it was taught, 'And he [becomes] a saris', from which [this]  may [well] be deduced. And. [in the case] where no symptoms of a saris developed, how long [is one regarded a minor]?  — R. Hiyya taught: Until he has passed middle age. Whenever [such a case]  came before R. Hiyya  he used to tell them, if [the youth was] emaciated, 'Let him [first] be fattened'; and if he was stout, he used to tell them, 'Let him [first] be made to lose weight'; for these symptoms appear sometimes as a result of emaciation [and] sometimes they develop as a result of stoutness. The question was raised: [Is] the intervening period  [regarded] as that of under, or over age?  — Raba said in the name of R. Nahman: The Intervening period is [regarded] as that of under age.  Raba son of R. Shila said in the name of R. Nahman: The intervening period is [regarded] as that of over age.  That [view] of Raba, however, was not stated  explicitly but was arrived at  inferentially. For there was a certain [youth], who during [his] 'intervening period' went and sold the estate [of his deceased father]. He came before Raba  [who] decided  that the action was illegal.  [The student] who saw [what had happened] thought [that Raba's reason was] because during the intervening period [one is regarded] as being under age;  but this is not [so]. In this [particular] case  [Raba] observed excessive foolishness, for [the youth] was [also] liberating his slaves [without any apparent cause]. Giddal b. Menashya sent [the following enquiry] to Raba:  Will our Master Instruct us [as to] what [is the ruling in the case of] a girl [who is] fourteen years and one day old [and] understands how to carry on business.  He sent [word] to him [in reply]: If she understands how to carry on a business, her purchase is [legal] purchase and her sale is [legal] sale.  Why did he not enquire of him  [about the case of] a boy? — The incident happened to be such.  Why did he not address his enquiry  [with reference to] a girl [who is] twelve years and one day old?  — That case happened to be of such a nature. A certain [youth who was] under twenty [years of age] sold the estate [he inherited] from his father in accordance with [the decision sent to] Giddal b. Menashya. [When] he appeared before Raba  his relatives told him,  'Go [and] eat dates, and throw the stones at Raba'.  He did so; [and Raba] said to them, 'His sale is not a [legal] sale'. When the verdict  had been written out for him, the buyers said to him, 'Go tell Raba: The scroll of Esther  [may be obtained] at a zuz [and] the master's written verdict  [cannot be obtained] at [less than] a zuz!' He went and told him [so]. [Thereupon. Raba] said to them, 'His sale is a [legal] sale'.  [When] the relatives told him  [that] the buyers had taught him,  he  replied to them, '[But] he understands [that which] is explained; [and] since he understands when explained, he possesses intelligence,  and his [previous] action  was due to  his excessive impudence. R. Huna son of R. Joshua said: As regards [the giving of] evidence, his  testimony [is legal] evidence. Mar Zutra said: This applies only  to [the case of] movables  but not to [that of] real estate. Said R. Ashi to Mar Zutra: Why only movables? [Is it] because his sale [of these] is a [legal] sale?  If so,  [would] the evidence of little children,  of whom  we learnt [that] their purchase [is a valid] purchase and their sale [is a legal] sale in [the case of] movables,  also [be regarded as legal] evidence?  — He replied to him: There  it is required [that] both the men shall stand  which is not [the case]. Amemar said: His  gift [is a valid] gift. Said R. Ashi to Amemar: [How] now! If in the case of a sale, where he receives money, it has been said that it is not [valid] because it is possible [that] he might sell too cheaply, how much more so [in the case of] a gift where he receives nothing! He replied to him: