In this daf, we are zocheh to delve into the halachos of how witnesses who are illiterate or unable to sign their names may still validate a document. The Gemara brings down a baraita discussing the use of a stencil or tearing a blank paper to guide a witness's signature, and we learn the beautiful, compassionate reasoning of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, who allows this leniency specifically for a get so that the daughters of Israel should not be left stranded as agunos.
We also explore the vital halachos of reading a document to a witness or a judge who cannot read it themselves, such as the elderly Rav Yehuda. The Gemara guides us through the strict parameters of when we can rely on scribes to read a document aloud, ensuring there is proper yiras Shamayim and awe of the court so that no deception can take place, and how we handle secular Persian documents in a kosher court of law.
תַּנְיָא כְּווֹתֵיהּ דְּרַב:
It is taught in a braisa in accordance with the opinion of Rav:
עֵדִים שֶׁאֵין יוֹדְעִין לַחְתּוֹם, מְקָרְעִין לָהֶן נְיָיר חָלָק וּמְמַלְּאִים אֶת הַקְּרָעִים דְּיוֹ.
In the case of witnesses who do not know how to sign, one tears a blank piece of paper for them in the shape of their signatures, and they fill in the gaps with ink.
אָמַר רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל: בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים – בְּגִיטֵּי נָשִׁים; אֲבָל בְּשִׁחְרוּרֵי עֲבָדִים וּשְׁאָר כׇּל הַשְּׁטָרוֹת, אִם יוֹדְעִין לִקְרוֹת וְלַחְתּוֹם – חוֹתְמִין, וְאִם לָאו – אֵין חוֹתְמִין.
Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said: In what case are these words said? Regarding bills of divorce for women; but regarding bills of manumission for slaves and all other documents, if they know how to read and to sign, they sign, and if not, they do not sign.
קְרִיָּיה מַאן דְּכַר שְׁמַהּ?
The Gemara asks: With regard to reading, who mentioned its name? Why does Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel mention the need for witnesses to be able to read when the discussion was only about signing?
חַסּוֹרֵי מִיחַסְּרָא, וְהָכִי קָתָנֵי:
The Gemara answers: The braisa is incomplete, and this is what it is teaching:
עֵדִים שֶׁאֵין יוֹדְעִין לִקְרוֹת – קוֹרִין לִפְנֵיהֶם וְחוֹתְמִים, וְשֶׁאֵין יוֹדְעִין לַחְתּוֹם כּוּ׳.
In the case of witnesses who do not know how to read, one reads in their presence and they sign; and in the case of those who do not know how to sign, one tears paper for them and they fill in the gaps with ink.
אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל: בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים, בְּגִיטֵּי נָשִׁים; אֲבָל שִׁחְרוּרֵי עֲבָדִים וּשְׁאָר כׇּל הַשְּׁטָרוֹת, אִם יוֹדְעִין לִקְרוֹת וְלַחְתּוֹם – חוֹתְמִין, וְאִם לָאו – אֵין חוֹתְמִין.
And regarding this, Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said: In what case are these words said? Regarding bills of divorce for women; but regarding bills of manumission for slaves and all other documents, if they know how to read and to sign, they sign, and if not, they do not sign.
אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: מַאי טַעְמָא דְּרַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל? שֶׁלֹּא יְהוּ בְּנוֹת יִשְׂרָאֵל עֲגוּנוֹת.
Rabbi Elazar said: What is the reason of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel for being lenient only with bills of divorce? It is so that the daughters of Israel should not be left as agunos, deserted wives, if they cannot find literate witnesses when the husband needs to leave in a hurry.
אָמַר רָבָא: הֲלָכָה כְּרַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל.
Rava said: The halakha is in accordance with Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel.
וְרַב גַּמָּדָא מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרָבָא אָמַר: אֵין הֲלָכָה.
And Rav Gamda in the name of Rava said: The halakha is not in accordance with Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel.
וְאֶלָּא כְּמַאן, כְּרַבָּנַן?!
The Gemara asks: Rather, in accordance with whom is the halakha? Is it in accordance with the Rabbis, who permit this for all documents?
וְהָא הָהוּא דַּעֲבַד עוֹבָדָא בִּשְׁאָר שְׁטָרוֹת, וְנַגְּדֵיהּ רַב כָּהֲנָא!
But wasn't there a certain person who performed an action of allowing witnesses to sign via a stencil in other documents, and Rav Kahana flogged him for doing so?
תַּרְגְּמַהּ אַקְּרִיאָה.
The Gemara answers: Rav Gamda interpreted the statement of Rava only with regard to reading, meaning that the halakha is in accordance with the Rabbis that other documents may be read to the witnesses, but not that they may sign other documents via a stencil.
רַב יְהוּדָה מִיצְטַעַר קָרֵי וְחָתֵים.
The Gemara relates: Rav Yehuda, in his old age, would pain himself to read and sign documents.
אֲמַר לֵיהּ עוּלָּא: לָא צְרִיכַתְּ, דְּהָא רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר מָרָא דְּאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל – קָרוּ קַמֵּיהּ וְחָתֵים, וְרַב נַחְמָן – קָרוּ קַמֵּיהּ סָפְרֵי דַּיָּינֵי וְחָתֵים.
Ulla said to him: You do not need to do this, as Rabbi Elazar, the master of Eretz Yisrael, they would read before him and he would sign; and Rav Naḥman, the court scribes would read before him and he would sign.
וְדַוְוקָא רַב נַחְמָן וְסָפְרֵי דַּיָּינֵי, דְּאִית לְהוּ אֵימְתָא, אֲבָל רַב נַחְמָן וְסָפְרֵי אַחֲרִינֵי, סָפְרֵי דַּיָּינֵי וְאִינִישׁ אַחֲרִינָא – לָא.
The Gemara notes: And this is specifically permitted for Rav Naḥman and the court scribes, because they have fear of him and would not lie, but Rav Naḥman and other scribes, or court scribes and another person, no, it is not permitted, because they might read it incorrectly.
רַב פָּפָּא, כִּי הֲוָה אָתֵי לְקַמֵּיהּ שְׁטָרָא פָּרְסָאָה דַּעֲבִיד בְּעַרְכָּאוֹת שֶׁל גּוֹיִם, מַקְרֵי לְהוּ לִשְׁנֵי גוֹיִם זֶה שֶׁלֹּא בִּפְנֵי זֶה בְּמֵסִיחַ לְפִי תּוּמּוֹ, וּמַגְבֵּי בֵּיהּ מִמְּשַׁעְבְּדִי.
Rav Pappa, when a Persian document that was made in the courts of gentiles would come before him, he would have it read to two gentiles, this one not in the presence of that one, speaking offhandedly, and he would collect with it even from liened property.
אָמַר רַב אָשֵׁי: אָמַר לִי רַב הוּנָא בַּר נָתָן, הָכִי אָמַר אַמֵּימָר: הַאי שְׁטָרָא פָּרְסָאָה דַּחֲתִימִי עֲלֵיהּ סָהֲדִי יִשְׂרָאֵל, מַגְבֵּינַן בֵּיהּ מִמְּשַׁעְבְּדִי.
Rav Ashi said: Rav Huna bar Natan said to me, so said Ameimar: This Persian document upon which Jewish witnesses are signed, we collect with it from liened property.
וְהָא לָא יָדְעִי לְמִיקְרֵי!
The Gemara asks: But they do not know how to read Persian!
בִּדְיָדְעִי.
The Gemara answers: This is where they do know how to read Persian.
וְהָא בָּעֵינַן כְּתָב שֶׁאֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְהִזְדַּיֵּיף, וְלֵיכָּא!
The Gemara asks: But don't we require writing that cannot be forged, and there is none in Persian documents?
בְּדַאֲפִיצָן.
The Gemara answers: This is where they treated the paper with gall, which prevents forgery.
וְהָא בָּעֵינַן ״צָרִיךְ לַחֲזוֹר מֵעִנְיָנוֹ שֶׁל שְׁטָר בְּשִׁיטָה אַחֲרוֹנָה״, וְלֵיכָּא!
The Gemara asks: But don't we require that it must repeat the matter of the document in the last line, and there is none in Persian documents?
בִּדְמַהְדַּר.
The Gemara answers: This is where it does repeat the matter in the last line.
וְאֶלָּא מַאי קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן – דְּכׇל לָשׁוֹן כָּשֵׁר?!
The Gemara asks: But rather, what is he teaching us? That any language is valid for a document?
תְּנֵינָא: גֵּט שֶׁכְּתָבוֹ עִבְרִית וְעֵדָיו יְוָנִית, יְוָנִית וְעֵדָיו עִבְרִית – כָּשֵׁר!
We already learned in a Mishnah: A bill of divorce that he wrote in Hebrew and its witnesses signed in Greek, or in Greek and its witnesses signed in Hebrew, is valid!
אִי מֵהַהִיא, הֲוָה אָמֵינָא: הָנֵי מִילֵּי בְּגִיטִּין, אֲבָל בִּשְׁאָר שְׁטָרוֹת – לָא, קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן.
The Gemara answers: If from that Mishnah alone, I would have said: These words apply only to bills of divorce where the Sages were lenient, but to other documents, no; therefore he teaches us that other documents are also valid in other languages.
אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: נָתַן לָהּ נְיָיר חָלָק, וְאָמַר לַהּ: ״הֲרֵי זֶה גִּיטֵּיךְ״ – מְגוֹרֶשֶׁת; חָיְישִׁינַן שֶׁמָּא בְּמֵי מֵילִין כְּתָבוֹ.
Shmuel said: If he gave her a blank piece of paper and said to her: "This is your bill of divorce," she is divorced out of doubt; we are concerned that perhaps he wrote it with gall water and the writing became invisible.
מֵיתִיבִי: ״הֲרֵי זֶה גִּיטֵּךְ״; וּנְטָלַתּוּ וּזְרָקַתּוּ לַיָּם, אוֹ לָאוּר, אוֹ לְכׇל דָּבָר הָאָבֵד; וְחָזַר וְאָמַר: ״שְׁטַר פַּסִּים הוּא״, ״שְׁטַר אֲמָנָה הוּא״ – מְגוֹרֶשֶׁת, וְלֹא כׇּל הֵימֶנּוּ לְאוֹסְרָהּ.
The Gemara raises an objection from a braisa: If he said, "This is your bill of divorce," and she took it and threw it into the sea, or into a fire, or into anything that destroys it, and he then said, "It was a document of appeasement," or "It was a document of trust," she is divorced, and it is not within his power to forbid her.
טַעְמָא דְּאִיכָּא כְּתָב, הָא לֵיכָּא כְּתָב – לָא!
The Gemara infers: The reason is that there is writing on the paper, but where there is no writing, she is not divorced! This contradicts Shmuel.
כִּי קָאָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל, דְּבָדְקִינַן לֵיהּ בְּמַיָּא דְנָרָא; אִי פָּלֵיט – פָּלֵיט, וְאִי לָא פָּלֵיט – לָאו כְּלוּם הוּא.
The Gemara answers: When Shmuel says this, it is a case where we test it with alum water; if it brings out the writing, it brings it out, and if it does not bring it out, it is nothing.
וְכִי פָּלֵיט מַאי הָוֵי? הַשְׁתָּא הוּא דְּפָלֵיט!
The Gemara asks: And even if it brings it out, what of it? It is only now that it is brought out, but at the time of delivery it was invisible!
שְׁמוּאֵל נָמֵי, ״חָיְישִׁינַן״ קָאָמַר.
The Gemara answers: Shmuel also said only "we are concerned", meaning we treat her as a doubtful divorcee.
אָמַר רָבִינָא: אֲמַר לִי אַמֵּימָר, הָכִי אָמַר מָרִימָר מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַב דִּימִי: הָנֵי בֵּי תְרֵי דְּיָהֵיב גִּיטָּא קַמַּיְיהוּ, צְרִיכִי לְמִיקְרְיֵיהּ.
Ravina said: Ameimar said to me, so said Marimar in the name of Rav Dimi: These two witnesses before whom he gives a bill of divorce must read it before it is delivered.
מֵיתִיבִי: ״הֲרֵי זֶה גִּיטֵּךְ״; וּנְטָלַתּוּ וּזְרָקַתּוּ לַיָּם, אוֹ לָאוּר, אוֹ לְכׇל דָּבָר הָאָבֵד; וְחָזַר וְאָמַר ״שְׁטַר פַּסִּים הוּא״, ״שְׁטַר אֲמָנָה הוּא״ – מְגוֹרֶשֶׁת, וְלֹא כׇל הֵימֶנּוּ לְאוֹסְרָהּ.
The Gemara raises an objection: If he said, "This is your bill of divorce," and she took it and threw it into the sea, or into a fire, or into anything that destroys it, and he then said, "It was a document of appeasement," or "It was a document of trust," she is divorced, and it is not within his power to forbid her.
וְאִי אָמְרַתְּ צְרִיכִי לְמִיקְרְיֵיהּ, בָּתַר דְּקַרְיוּהּ מִי מָצֵי אָמַר לַהּ הָכִי?!
And if you say they must read it, after they read it, can he say this to her and claim it was a different document?
לָא צְרִיכָא, דְּבָתַר דְּקַרְיוּהּ עַיְּילֵיהּ לְבֵי יְדֵיהּ וְאַפְּקֵיהּ, מַהוּ דְּתֵימָא: חַלּוֹפֵי חַלְּפֵיהּ, קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן.
The Gemara answers: No, it is necessary for a case where after they read it, he put it into his sleeve and took it out again; lest you say he exchanged it, it teaches us that we do not suspect this.
הָהוּא גַּבְרָא דִּזְרַק לָהּ גִּיטָּא לִדְבֵיתְהוּ לְבֵינֵי דַנֵּי, אִשְׁתְּכַח מְזוּזְתָּא.
There was a certain man who threw a bill of divorce to his wife between the barrels, and a mezuzah was found there instead.
אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן: מְזוּזְתָּא בֵּינֵי דַנֵּי לָא שְׁכִיחָא.
Rav Naḥman said: A mezuzah is not commonly found between barrels, so we assume the document he threw was indeed the get, and it was lost.
וְהָנֵי מִילֵּי דְּאִשְׁתְּכַח חֲדָא, אֲבָל שְׁנַיִם שְׁלֹשָׁה – מִדְּהָא הֲוַאי, הָא נָמֵי הֲוַאי; וְגִיטָּא – אֵימוֹר עַכְבָּרִים שַׁקְלוּהּ.
And this applies only where one mezuzah was found, but if two or three were found, we say since these were there, this other one was also there beforehand; and as for the bill of divorce, say that mice took it.
הָהוּא גַּבְרָא דְּעָל לְבֵי כְנִישְׁתָּא, שְׁקַל סֵפֶר תּוֹרָה יְהַב לָהּ לִדְבֵיתְהוּ, וַאֲמַר לַהּ: הֵא גִּיטִּיךְ.
There was a certain man who entered the synagogue, took a Sefer Torah, gave it to his wife, and said to her: "Here is your bill of divorce."
אֲמַר רַב יוֹסֵף: לְמַאי לֵיחוּשׁ לַהּ? אִי מִשּׁוּם מֵי מֵילִין – אֵין מֵי מֵילִין עַל גַּבֵּי מֵי מֵילִין;
Rav Yosef said: For what should we be concerned? If because of gall water being written on it, one cannot write gall water on top of gall water, and the Torah is already written with ink.
The sugya begins by clarifying the baraita regarding illiterate witnesses, explaining that we may read a document to them or allow them to sign using a stencil, a leniency Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel limits to gittin to prevent agunos. The Gemara rules that while we are lenient regarding reading other documents to witnesses, we do not allow stencils for documents other than gittin. We then learn that a great authority may have court scribes read a document to him if they stand in awe of him, as was the case with Rav Nachman. Finally, the Gemara discusses the validity of Persian documents, establishing that they may be used to collect even from liened property, provided the witnesses can read the language, the paper is treated with gall to prevent forgery, and the document properly recaps its main points in the final line.
In our daf, we see the beautiful and deep sensitivity of Chazal for the daughters of Israel. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel teaches that while we are normally very strict about the qualifications of witnesses on a document, we are lenient for a bill of divorce, allowing witnesses who cannot write to sign using a stencil. Why? Rabbi Elazar explains: "So that the daughters of Israel should not be deserted." The Sages were willing to adjust the standard procedures of the court just to save one Jewish woman from the pain of being an agunah.
Think about the depth of this lesson for our own daily lives. If the Torah and our Sages are willing to bend the strict rules of legal documents to prevent a single Jewish soul from experiencing loneliness and distress, how much more must we be willing to bend our own schedules, our pride, and our personal comfort to help another Yid who is feeling isolated or in pain?
True avodah means looking around at the people in our lives and asking: Who is feeling abandoned? Who is sitting alone in shul, or struggling through a difficult time without anyone checking in on them? We must never let a fellow Jew feel deserted when it is in our power to reach out.
Today, make a conscious effort to notice someone who might be feeling lonely or overwhelmed, and reach out to them with a warm word, a phone call, or a friendly smile to let them know they are not alone.