Jerusalem Talmud Gittin 1.4

משנה: כָּל גֵּט שֶׁיֵּשׁ עָלָיו עֵד כּוּתִי פָּסוּל חוּץ מִגִּיטֵּי נָשִׁים וְשִׁיחֲרוּרֵי עֲבָדִים. מַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁהֵבִיאוּ לִפְנֵי רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל לִכְפַר עוֹתְנַי גֵּט אִשָּׁה וְהָיוּ עֵידָיו עֵידֵי כוּתִים וְהִכְשִׁירוֹ. כָּל הַשְּׁטָרוֹת הָעוֹלִין בְּעַרְכָאוֹת שֶׁלַּגּוֹיִם אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁחוֹתְמֵיהֶן גּוֹיִם כְּשֵׁירִים חוּץ מִגִּיטֵּי נָשִׁים וְשִׁיחֲרוּרֵי עֲבָדִים. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר כּוּלָּן כְּשֵׁירִין לֹא הוּזְכְּרוּ אֶלָּא בִזְמַן שֶׁנַּעֲשׂוּ בַהֶדְיוֹט.

MISHNAH: Any document signed by a Samaritan is invalid, except bills of divorce and bills of manumission. It happened that they brought before Rabban Gamliel at Kefar Othnay a bill of divorce whose witnesses were Samaritans and he declared it valid. All documents confirmed by a Gentile recorder’s office are valid, even if they are signed by Gentiles, except bills of divorce and bills of manumission. Rebbi Simeon says, all are valid; they said it only when they were made by private persons.

הלכה: כָּל גֵּט שֶׁיֵּשׁ עָלָיו עֵד כּוּתִי פָּסוּל כול׳. עַל הַמָּמוֹן נֶחְשְׁדוּ וְעַל הַמָּמוֹן נִפְסְלוּ. לֹא נֶחְשְׁדוּ עַל הָעֲרָיוֹת. וְעֵידֵי נְפָשׁוֹת כְּעֵידֵי עֲרָיוֹת. מֵעַתָּה אֲפִילוּ שְׁנֵיהֶן כּוּתִים. שַׁנְיָיא הִיא שֶׁאֵינָן בְּקִיאִין בְּדִיקְדּוּקֵי גִּיטִּין. מֵעַתָּה אֲפִילוּ כוּתִי אֶחָד יִהְיֶה פָסוּל. אָמַר רִבִּי אָבִין. תִּיפְתָּר שֶׁחָתַם יִשְׂרָאֵל בַּסּוֹף. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. אַתְיָיא כְּמָאן דְּאָמַר. עֵדִים חוֹתְמִין זֶה שֶׁלֹּא כְנֶגֶד זֶה. בְּרַם כְּמָאן דְּאָמַר. אֵין עֵדִים חוֹתְמִין אֶלָּא זֶה בִפְנֵי זֶה. אֲפִילוּ חָתַם כּוּתִי בַּסּוֹף כָּשֵׁר.

HALAKHAH: “Any document signed by a Samaritan is invalid,” etc. They are suspected about money; about money they were disqualified.They are not suspected about incest and adultery. And testimony in capital criminal cases has the same status as testimony about incest and adultery. Then even if both of them are Samaritans? There is a difference, for they are not conversant with the fine points of bills of divorce. Then even one Samaritan witness should be disqualified! Rebbi Abin said, explain it if a Jew signed last. Rebbi Yose said, that is according to the opinion that the witnesses may sign separately, not in the presence of each other. But according to him who says that witnesses may sign only in the presence of each other, it is valid even if the Samaritan signed last.

שְׁטָר שֶׁחוֹתָמוֹ בְאַרְבָּעָה עֵדִים וְנִמְצְאוּ שְׁנַיִם הָרִאשׁוֹנִים קְרוֹבִים אוֹ פְסוּלִים כָּשֵׁר וְתִתְקַיֵים הָעֵדוּת בַּשְּׁאָר. רִבִּי אִילָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יָסָא. אַתְיָיא כְּמָאן דְּאָמַר. אֵין הָעֵדִים חוֹתְמִין אֶלָּא זֶה בִפְנֵי זֶה. בְּרַם כְּמָאן דְּאָמַר. עֵדִים חוֹתְמִין זֶה שֶׁלֹּא בִּפְנֵי זֶה. אֲפִילוּ חָתַם יִשְׂרָאֵל בַּסּוֹף פָּסוּל. וְיֵעָשֶׂה בְּהַרְחֵק עֵדוּת וִיהֵא פָסוּל. לֵית יְכִיל. דְּקָאָמַר רִבִּי יָסָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה. עֵדִים פְּסוּלִין אֵינָן נַעֲשִׂין כְּהַרְחֵק עֵדוּת. שֶׁלֹּא בָאוּ אֶלָּא לְהֶכְשֵׁירוֹ שֶׁלַּגֵּט.

If a bond was signed by four witnesses and it turned out that the first two were relatives or disqualified, it is valid and is confirmed by the remaining testimony. Rebbi Ila in the name of Rebbi Yasa: This follows him who says that witnesses sign only in the presence of each other. But following him who says that witnesses may sign without being in the presence of each other, even if the Jew signed last it is invalid. And would it not be remote testimony? That one cannot say since Rebbi Yasa said in the name of Rebbi Jeremiah that disqualified witnesses do not constitute remote testimony since they came only to support the document’s validity.

כּוּתִים מִשּׁוּם מַה הֵן פְּסוּלִין. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. מִשּׁוּם גֵּירִי אֲרָיוֹת. וְקַשְׁיָא. אִילּוּ מִי שֶׁלֹּא נִתְגַּיֵיר לְשׁוּם שָׁמַיִם וְחָזַר וְנִתְגַּיֵיר לְשׁוּם שָׁמַיִם שֶׁמָּא אֵין מְקַבְּלִין אוֹתוֹ. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר. מִשּׁוּם גּוֹי וְעֶבֶד הַבָּא עַל יִשְׂרְאֵלִית הַוְולָד מַמְזֵר. וְהָאָמַר רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה. גֵּירֵי צֶדֶק הֵן. עַל שֵׁם שֶׁהֵן מְיַיבְּמִין אֶת הָאֲרוּסוֹת וּמוֹצִיאִין אֶת הַנְּשׂוּאוֹת. וְהָא רַבָּנִין אָמְרִין. אֵין מַמְזֵר בִּיבָמָה. עַל שֵׁם שֶׁאֵינָן בְּקִיאִין בְּדִיקְדּוּקֵי גִּיטִּין. הָא רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל מַכְשִׁיר בְּגִיטֵּיהֶן. רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אִידִי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. עַל שֶׁנִּתְעָרְבוּ בָהֶם כֹּהֲנֵי בָמוֹת. וַיַּעַשׂ כֹּהֲנִים מִקְּצֹת הָעָם. אָמַר רִבִּי אִילָא. מִן הַקּוֹצִים שֶׁבָּעָם וּמִן הַפְּסוֹלֶת שֶׁבָּעָם.

Why are Samaritans disqualified? Rebbi Joḥanan said, because they are lions’ proselytes. But if somebody converted not for Heaven’s sake and then converted for Heaven’s sake, does one not accept him? Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: Because the child is a bastard if a Gentile or a slave have intercourse with a Jewish woman. But did not Rebbi Aqiba say, they are genuine proselytes? Because they require levirate marriage from the preliminarily married and free the definitively married. But do not the rabbis say, there is no bastard from a sister-in-law? Because they are not conversant with the fine points in writing bills of divorce. But does not Rabban Gamliel accept their bills of divorce? Rebbi Jacob bar Idi in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Because they intermingled with the priests of the High Places: “He chose priests from the borderline of the people,”. Rebbi Ila said, from the “thorns” of the people, i. e., from the disqualified of the people.

אָמַר רִבִּי אָחָא. קוֹל יוֹצֵא בָּאַרְכֶּיִים. מֵעַתָּה אֲפִילוּ שְׁנֵיהֶן כּוּתִים. שֶׁהָיָה הוּא אוֹמֵר. שֶׁאֵינָן בְּקִיאִין בְּדִיקְדּוּקֵי גִיטִּין. וְהָא רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן מַכְשִׁיר בְּגִיטֵּיהֶן. רִבִּי בָּא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי זְעִירָא. אַתְיָיא דְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן כְּרִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר. כְּמָה דְּרִבִּי לָעְזָר אָמַר. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין עָלָיו עֵדִים. כָּשֵׁר. כֵּן רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אָמַר. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין עָלָיו עֵדִים כָּשֵׁר. מֵעַתָּה אֲפִילוּ נַעֲשֶׂה בְהֶדְיוֹט. הֲוֵי צוֹרְכָא לְהַהוּא דָּמַר רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אָחָא. קוֹל יוֹצֵא בָּאַרְכֶּיִים. שְׁטָר יוֹצֵא בְבֵית שְׁאָן וְהָיוּ עֵדָיו עֵידֵי גוֹיִם. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר. אִיתְפַּלְּגוֹן רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן וְרֵישׁ לָקִישׁ. חַד אָמַר. פָּסוּל. וְחַד אָמַר. כָּשֵׁר. רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ מְפָרֵשׁ. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר. פָּסוּל. וְרֵישׁ לָקִישׁ אָמַר. כָּשֵׁר. וּמַה טַעֲמָא דְּרֵישׁ לָקִישׁ. שֶׁלֹּא לְהַפְסִיד לְיִשְׂרָאֵל מָמוֹן. וַאֲפִילוּ דְּלֵית מַפְסִיד לְדֵין מַפְסִיד לְדֵין. אָמַר רִבִּי יוּדָן. אֶלָּא כְדֵי שֶׁלֹּא לִנְעוֹל אֶת הַדֶּלֶת לִפְנֵי בְנֵי אָדָם. שֶׁלְּמָחָר הוּא מְבַקֵּשׁ לִלְווֹת וְהוּא אֵינוֹ מוֹצֵא.

Rebbi Aḥa said, the acts of a Gentile court are public knowledge. Then even if both [witnesses] are Samaritan? Did one not say that they are not conversant with the fine points in writing bills of divorce? But Rebbi Simeon validates their bills of divorce! Rebbi Abba in the name of Rebbi Ze‘ira: It turns out that Rebbi Simeon agrees with Rebbi Eleazar. Just as Rebbi Eleazar said, even if no witnesses signed on it, it is valid, so Rebbi Simeon said, even if no witnesses signed on it, it is valid. But then even if it was made by private persons? This shows that it was necessary that Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa said, the acts of a Gentile court are public knowledge. A bond was executed in Bet Shean, whose witnesses were Gentiles. Rebbi Yose says, Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish disagree, one said it is invalid, the other said it is valid. Rebbi Abbahu explained: Rebbi Joḥanan said it is invalid, Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said it is valid. What is Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish’s reason? That a Jew should not lose money. But if that one would not lose money, the other would lose money! Rebbi Yudan said, it must be in order not to close the door before people, for tomorrow one would look to borrow but does not succeed.