Gittin, Daf Tet, Part 4

 

Introduction

In light of the mishnah, the Talmud goes on to offer other comparisons between manumission documents and divorce documents.

 

אֶחָד גִּיטֵּי נָשִׁים וְאֶחָד שִׁיחְרוּרֵי עֲבָדִים

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן בִּשְׁלֹשָׁה דְּרָכִים שָׁווּ גִּיטֵּי נָשִׁים לְשִׁיחְרוּרֵי עֲבָדִים שָׁווּ לַמּוֹלִיךְ וְלַמֵּבִיא

וְכׇל גֵּט שֶׁיֵּשׁ עָלָיו עֵד כּוּתִי פָּסוּל חוּץ מִגִּיטֵּי נָשִׁים וְשִׁחְרוּרֵי עֲבָדִים

וְכׇל הַשְּׁטָרוֹת הָעוֹלִים בְּעַרְכָּאוֹת שֶׁל גּוֹיִם אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁחוֹתְמֵיהֶן גּוֹיִם כְּשֵׁירִין חוּץ מִגִּיטֵּי נָשִׁים וְשִׁחְרוּרֵי עֲבָדִים

 

Both divorce documents and documents of manumission:

Our rabbis taught: There are three ways in which divorce documents and documents of manumission are the same: They are the same [concerning a messenger] who takes them [abroad from the land of Israel and one who brings them [from abroad to the land of Israel].

And any get (document) that has on it a Samaritan witness is disqualified, except for divorce documents and documents of manumission.

And any document produced in a Gentile court is valid even if the signees are Gentiles except for divorce documents and documents of manumission.

 

The mishnah listed one way in which divorce documents and documents of manumission are the same the messenger must make the declaration. The baraita lists two more ways:

1)     Divorce and slave documents with Samaritan witnesses are valid.

2)     Documents produced in Gentile courts with Gentile witnesses are valid except for divorce documents and documents of manumission.

 

וּכְדִבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר בְּאַרְבָּעָה הָאוֹמֵר תֵּן גֵּט זֶה לְאִשְׁתִּי וּשְׁטַר שִׁחְרוּר זֶה לְעַבְדִּי רָצָה לַחֲזוֹר בִּשְׁנֵיהֶם יַחְזוֹר דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר

And according to R. Meir there are four: One who says, Give this get to my wife or this document of manumission to my slave if he wants, he can retract in both cases, the words of R. Meir.

 

According to R. Meir there is a fourth similarity a husband or master can retract a statement to give a get to a woman or a document of manumission to a slave.

 

בִּשְׁלָמָא לְרַבָּנַן מִנְיָנָא לְמַעוֹטֵי הָא דְּרַבִּי מֵאִיר אֶלָּא לְרַבִּי מֵאִיר מִנְיָנָא לְמַעוֹטֵי מַאי לְמַעוֹטֵי הָא דְּתַנְיָא עֵדִים שֶׁאֵין יוֹדְעִים לַחְתּוֹם מְקָרְעִין לָהֶם נְיָיר חָלָק וּמְמַלְּאִים אֶת הַקְּרָעִים דְּיוֹ

אָמַר רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים בְּגִיטֵּי נָשִׁים אֲבָל שִׁחְרוּרֵי עֲבָדִים וּשְׁאָר כׇּל הַשְּׁטָרוֹת אִם יוֹדְעִין לִקְרוֹת וְלַחְתּוֹם חוֹתְמִין וְאִם לָאו אֵין חוֹתְמִין

 

It makes sense for the rabbis that the number comes to exclude the case referred to by R. Meir. But to R. Meir, why do we need a number? To exclude that which was taught, Witnesses that do not know how to sign, we can rip for them blank paper and fill in the rips with ink.

Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel said: To what does this refer? To documents of divorce, but documents of manumission and other documents, if they know how to read and sign, they sign. And if not, they do not sign.

 

The Talmud assumes that in lists of laws, the number comes to exclude. The rabbis say there are three ways these documents are similar and not four, to exclude R. Meir s ruling. But R. Meir has to exclude something as well. So what does he exclude?

He excludes the case of witnesses who do not know how to sign their name. According to the baraita, there is some system of tearing paper that can be used to fill in the names of those who do not even know how to write their own name.

Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel limits this to gittin divorce documents. For all other documents, including documents of manumission, if the person does not know how to sign their name, they cannot be a witness.

 

קְרִיָּיה מַאן דְּכַר שְׁמַיהּ חַסּוֹרֵי מְחַסְּרָא וְהָכִי קָתָנֵי עֵדִים שֶׁאֵין יוֹדְעִין לִקְרוֹת קוֹרִין לִפְנֵיהֶם וְחוֹתְמִין וְשֶׁאֵין יוֹדְעִין לַחְתּוֹם מְקָרְעִין לָהֶם

 

Read who mentioned that! The text is defective and this is how it should read: Witnesses who do not know how to read, they read in front of them (the text of the document) and they sign. But those who do not know how to sign, they tear the document for them.

 

Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel mentioned that the witnesses do not know how to read. But we are talking about signing a document, not reading one. So why mention reading?

The Talmud emends his statement to make more sense. If they can t read the document, then we can read it for them and they can sign. But if they don t know how to sign, then the tear the paper trick must be used.