Bava Batra

'Once a statement has been made it cannot be withdrawn',  it is not the nature of a scholar to take particular note [of a woman's face]. A certain receipt  on which the signature of R. Jeremiah b. Abba appeared [was produced, but the woman] said to him, 'It was not I'.  'I am sure',  he insisted,  'it was you'. Said Abaye: Although a scholar is not in the habit of taking note [of a woman's appearance], when [however] he does take notice he is relied upon. Abaye said: A scholar who desires  to betroth a woman should take with him a layman  [so that another woman] might [not] be substituted for her [who would be taken away] from him. AND THE HUSBAND PAYS THE FEE etc. What is the reason? — Because Scripture says: And he shall write … and give.  And why is this not done  at the present time? — The Rabbis have imposed it  upon the woman to order that he might not cause her [undue] delay. A BOND MAY BE WRITTEN FOR A BORROWER THOUGH THE LENDER IS NOT PRESENT etc. [Is not this] obvious?  — [This  would] not [have been] required [except] in [the case of a loan for] merchandise on shares. A DEED [OF SALE] MAYBE WRITTEN FOR THE SELLER IN THE ABSENCE OF THE BUYER etc. [Is not this] obvious?  — [This would] not [have been] required [except in the case] where one sells his field on account of its inferiority. DEEDS OF BETROTHAL AND MARRIAGE ARE NOT WRITTEN etc. [Is this not] obvious?  — [This would] not [have been] required [except for the fact] that even a scholar [has to pay the fee] though it is a satisfaction to his father-in-law to bring him into his family. A CONTRACT OF TENANCY ON SHARES OR ON A FIXED RENTAL IS NOT WRITTEN etc. [Is not this] obvious? — [It would] not [have been] required [except for the case] where [the land is to lie] fallow. DEEDS OF ARBITRATION … ARE NOT WRITTEN EXCEPT WITH THE APPROVAL OF BOTH PARTIES etc. What [is meant by] shetare berurin?  — Here  it was explained [as] 'records of the pleas'.  R. Jeremiah b. Abba explained: One  [of the litigants] chooses one and the other chooses another. RABBAN SIMEON B. GAMALIEL SAID: TWO [DEEDS] MAY BE WRITTEN FOR THE TWO PARTIES, ONE FOR EACH. May it be suggested [that] they are in dispute on [the principle of] exercising force against a Sodomite character;  for [one] Master  is of the opinion [that] force is exercised  and the [other] Master  is of the opinion that force is not exercised!  — No; both  [agree that] force is exercised, but the reason of Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel here  is this: Because [one can] say to the other,  'I do not like your rights to be at the side of my rights, for you appear to me as a lurking lion'. MISHNAH. [IN THE CASE] WHERE [A PERSON] PAID A PART OF HIS DEBT AND THE BOND WAS DEPOSITED WITH A THIRD PARTY TO WHOM [THE BORROWER SAID]. 'IF I WILL NOT PAY YOU [THE BALANCE] BETWEEN NOW AND  A CERTAIN DATE, GIVE HIM  HIS BOND', [AND] THE DATE ARRIVED AND HE DID NOT PAY, R. JOSE SAID: HE  SHALL GIVE [IT];  R. JUDAH SAID, HE SHALL NOT GIVE [IT]. GEMARA. Wherein  [lies] the difference between them? — R. Jose holds [that] asmakta  conveys possession.  and R. Judah holds [that] an asmakta does not convey possession.  R. Nahman in the name of Rabbah b. Abbuha in the name of Rab said: The halachah is according to R. Jose. When [such cases]  came before R Ammi, he said: 'Since R. Johanan has taught us again and again  [that] the halachah is according to R. Jose, what can I do?' The halachah, however, is not according to R. Jose. MISHNAH. IF A MAN'S BOND OF INDEBTEDNESS WAS EFFACED, HE MUST SECURE  WITNESSES,  AND APPEAR BEFORE A COURT OF LAW WHERE HE IS SUPPLIED WITH [THE FOLLOWING] ATTESTATION: 'THE BOND OF X SON OF Y WAS FADED ON SUCH AND SUCH A DATE,