Jerusalem Talmud Yevamot 14.2

משנה: אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי וְכִי מִפְּנֵי מָה הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁנִּתְחָרְשָּׁה יוֹצְאָה וְהָאִישׁ שֶׁנִּתְחָרַשׁ אֵינוֹ מוֹצִיא. אָמְרוּ לוֹ אֵינוֹ דוֹמֶה הָאִישׁ הַמְגָרֵשׁ לָאִשָּׁה הַמִּתְגָּרֶשֶׁת שֶׁהָאִשָּׁה יוֹצְאָה לִרְצוֹנָהּ וְשֶׁלֹּא לִרְצוֹנָהּ וְהָאִישׁ אֵינוֹ מוֹצִיא אֶלָּא לִרְצוֹנוֹ. הֵעִיד רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן גּוּדְגָּדָה עַל הַחֵרֶשֶׁת שֶׁהִשִּׂיאָהּ אָבִיהָ שֶׁהִיא יוֹצְאָה בְגֵט אָמְרוּ לוֹ אַף זוֹ כַּיּוֹצֵא בָהּ.

MISHNAH: Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri said, why can a deaf-mute woman be divorced but a deaf-mute man cannot divorce? They told him, a divorcing man is not comparable to a divorced woman since a woman can be divorced with or against her will but a man divorces only by his own will. Rebbi Joḥanan ben Gudgada testified about a deaf-mute girl who was married off by her father that she could be divorced by a bill of divorce. They said to him, that is an example.

הלכה: הֵעִיד רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי כול׳. רִבִּי חֲנַנְיָה בְּעָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי הִילָא. נִרְאִין הַדְּבָרִים בְּפִיקַּחַת שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּהּ דַּעַת שֶׁהִיא יוֹצְאָה בֵּין לְדַעַת בֵין שֶׁלֹּא לְדַעַת. וְחֵרֶשֶׁת שֶׁאֵין בָּהּ דַּעַת לֹא תֵצֵא אֶלָּא לְדַעַת. וְלֹא עֵידוּת הִיא. אַף זוֹ כְיוֹצֵא בָהּ וּמוֹסִיפִין עַל הָעֵדוּת. וְרִבִּי חֲנַנְיָה סָבַר מֵימַר בְּפִיקַּחַת שֶׁהִשִּׂיאָהּ אָבִיהָ וְנִתְחָרְשָׁה. רִבִּי יוֹסֵה סָבַר מֵימַר בִּקְטַנָּה שֶׁהִשִּׂיאָהּ אָבִיהָ וְנִתְגָּרְשָׁה.

HALAKHAH: “Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri testified,” etc. Rebbi Ḥananiah asked before Rebbi Hila. The matters seem reasonable for a hearing woman of sound mind, that she is divorced with or without her acquiescence. But a deaf-mute woman who has no will should not be divorced except with her acquiescence. But is it not testimony “that is an example”; does one add to a testimony? But Rebbi Ḥanania is of the opinion that this deals with a hearing girl who was married off by her father and became deaf-and-dumb. Rebbi Yose is of the opinion that this deals with an underage girl who was married off by her father and became divorced.

אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. לֵית כֵּן עַל רֹאשָׁהּ. אִית כֵּן עַל סוֹפָהּ. מַה אִית כֵּן עַל רֹאשָׁהּ. כְּשֶׁהָיָה חֵרֵשׁ בַּעַל הַחֵרֶשֶׁת פִּיקֵּחַ בַּעַל הַפִּקַּחַת. אֲבָל אִם הָיָה חֵרֵשׁ בַּעַל הַפִּיקַּחַת פִּיקֵּחַ בַּעַל חֵרֶשֶׁת הָדָא הִיא דְתַנִּינָן דְּבָתָר דְּבָתָר דְּבַתְרָה.

Rebbi Joḥanan said, there is nothing to be learned from the beginning, but there is something to be learned from the end. What is there at the beginning? If the deaf-mute [brother] was the husband of the deaf-mute [woman] and the hearing the husband of the hearing. But if the deaf-mute [brother] was the husband of the hearing [woman] and the hearing the husband of the deaf-mute, that should have been stated at the very end.