Gittin, Daf Yod Aleph, Part 2

תַּנְיָא אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי כָּךְ אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן לַחֲכָמִים בְּצַיְדָּן לֹא נֶחְלְקוּ רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא וַחֲכָמִים עַל כׇּל הַשְּׁטָרוֹת הָעוֹלִין בְּעַרְכָּאוֹת שֶׁל גּוֹיִם שֶׁאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁחוֹתְמֵיהֶן גּוֹיִם כְּשֵׁרִים וַאֲפִילּוּ גִּיטֵּי נָשִׁים וְשִׁחְרוּרֵי עֲבָדִים לֹא נֶחְלְקוּ אֶלָּא בִּזְמַן שֶׁנַּעֲשׂוּ בְּהֶדְיוֹט שֶׁרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא מַכְשִׁיר וַחֲכָמִים פּוֹסְלִים חוּץ מִגִּיטֵּי נָשִׁים וְשִׁחְרוּרֵי עֲבָדִים

רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר אַף אֵלּוּ כְּשֵׁירִין בִּמְקוֹם שֶׁאֵין יִשְׂרָאֵל חוֹתְמִין אֲבָל בִּמְקוֹם שֶׁיִּשְׂרָאֵל חוֹתְמִין לָא

It was taught in a baraita: R. Elazar son of R. Yose said: This is what R. Shimon said to the sages in Sidon: R. Akiva and the sages did not disagree about all documents that are brought up in Gentile courts, that even though the signatures are non-Jews, they are valid. And even divorce documents and documents of manumission. They only disagreed when they were done by ordinary people, that R. Akiva allows them, and the sages disqualify them, except for divorce documents and manumission documents.

Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says: These too are valid in a place where Jews do not sign, but in a place where Jews sign, they are not valid.

In the baraita here, R. Elazar, R. Shimon s son, has a different version of the dispute between R. Shimon and the sages. Everyone allows all documents drawn up in Gentile courts as long as they are done by professionals. Although they are Gentiles, they can be relied upon to properly draw up documents. R. Akiva even allows them if they are done by ordinary, non-professional Gentiles. But the sages disqualify such documents, except if these are divorce or manumission documents, which are always valid.

According to Rashi, Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel limits the validity of divorce and manumission documents. These documents are only valid if they are done in a place where Jews are not allowed to sign. In such a place, everyone will know that the Jews are not allowed to sign and therefore they will know that the get must have been transmitted in front of Jewish witnesses. But if Jews can sign, people might think that the get relies on non-Jewish witnesses and therefore he invalidates such documents.

מְקוֹם שֶׁאֵין יִשְׂרָאֵל חוֹתְמִין נָמֵי לִיגְזוֹר אַטּוּ מְקוֹם שֶׁיִּשְׂרָאֵל חוֹתְמִין שֶׁמָּא בִּשְׁמָא מִחַלַּף אַתְרָא בְּאַתְרָא לָא מִחַלַּף

Let them decree [that documents should be invalid] also in a place where Jews do not sign, lest [they validate] in a place where Jews do sign.

They might confuse one name with another, but a place with another they won t confuse.

The Talmud asks why they shouldn t decree that the get is invalid in a place where Jews don t sign, lest they come to validate in a place where they do sign. After all, according to this version of the dispute, even if the names are obviously those of non-Jews, if they are in the place where Jews sign, the get is invalid.

The answer has to do with what types of confusion a person might make. If they validate the get in a case where the names are obviously not Jewish, then they might validate the get in a place where the names might be Jewish. This would be a problem, because a name that people think is Jewish, might not be Jewish. But if no Jews sign on documents in a particular place, then they won t confuse such a place where Jews do sign.