Jerusalem Talmud Gittin 9.3

משנה: שְׁלֹשָׁה גִיטִּין פְּסוּלִין וְאִם נִישֶּׂאת הַוְולָד כָּשֵׁר. כָּתַב בְּכְתָב יָדוֹ וְאֵין עָלָיו עֵדִים יֵשׁ עָלָיו עֵדִים וְאֵין בּוֹ זְמַן יֵשׁ בּוֹ זְמַן וְאֵין בּוֹ אֶלָּא עֵד אֶחָד. הֲרֵי אֵילּוּ שְׁלֹשָׁה גִיטִּין פְּסוּלִין וְאִם נִישֵּׂאת הַוְולָד כָּשֵׁר.

MISHNAH: Three kinds of bills of divorce are invalid, but if she married, the child is legitimate: If he wrote in his own handwriting but it was not signed by witnesses; it was signed by witnesses but is not dated; it is dated but only one witness signed it. These are three invalid kinds of bills of divorce, but if she married, the child is legitimate.

הלכה: הֲרֵי אַתְּ מוּתֶּרֶת לְכָל אָדָם כול׳. לֵית כָּאן סְפֵק גֵּירוּשִׁין אֶלָּא גֵּירוּשִׁין מַמָּשׁ. כֵּיצַד סְפֵק קִידּוּשִׁין. כַּיי דְּתַנִּינָן תַּמָּן. זָרַק לָהּ קִידּוּשִׁין. סָפֵק קָרוֹב לָהּ סָפֵק קָרוֹב לוֹ. זֶהוּ סְפֵק קִידּוּשִׁין. וְהָכָא הוּא זָרַק לָהּ גִּיטָּהּ. סָפֵק קָרוֹב לוֹ סָפֵק קָרוֹב לָהּ. זֶהוּ סְפֵק גֵּירוּשִׁין.

HALAKHAH: “You are permitted to any man,” etc. There really is no questionable divorce here. What are questionable qiddušin? As we have stated there: If he threw the betrothal gift to her and there is a doubt whether it fell closer to him or to her, those are questionable qiddušin. And here, if he threw the divorce document to her and there is a doubt whether it fell closer to him or to her, that is a questionable divorce.

רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בְּשֶׁם רִבִּי חֲלַפְתָּא דְמִן חוח. וְכוּלָּן אִם נִיסֵּית לֹא תֵצֵא. שֶׁלֹּא לְהוֹצִיא לִיזָה עַל בָּנֵיהָ. בִּתּוֹ שֶׁנִּיסֵּית לַשּׁוּק בְּגֵט זֶה לֹא תֵצֵא. כְּדֵי לִיזּוּק צָרָתָהּ לְאָבִיהָ. צָרָתָהּ שֶׁנִּישֵּׂאת לַשּׁוּק בְּגֵט זֶה תֵצֵא. בִּתּוֹ שֶׁנִּישֵּׂאת לְאָחִיו אֲפִילוּ לְאָבִיהָ לֹא תֵצֵא.

Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Ḥalaphta from Haifa: Any who were married on the basis of such a document should not leave in order not to give a bad reputation to her children. His daughter who was married outside on the basis of such a document should not leave in order to damage her co-wife to her father. Her co-wife who was married outside on the basis of such a document has to leave. His daughter who married his brother [on the basis of such a document has to leave. Her co-wife who was married to his brother] on the basis of such a document, or even to her father, should not leave.

תַּנֵּי שְׁלֹשָׁה שְׁטָרוֹת הַלָּלוּ גוֹבֶה מִבְּנֵי חוֹרִין וְאֵינֹה גוֹבֶה מִן הַמְשׁוּעֲבָדִין. אָמַר רִבִּי בָּא. הָדָא דְתֵימָר בְּשֶׁלֹּא הוּחְזַק שְׁטָר בְּיַד הַמַּלְוֶה. [אֲבָל הוּחְזַק הַשְּׁטָר בְּיַד הַמַּלְוֶה גוֹבֶה. רִבִי יוֹסֵה בָּעֵי. אִם שֶׁלֹּא הוּחְזַק הַשְּׁטָר בְּיַד הַמַּלְוֶה] אֲפִילוּ מִבְּנֵי חוֹרִין אֵינוֹ גוֹבֶה. אֶלָּא כֵן אֲנָן קַיָימִין בְּשֶׁהוּחְזַק שְׁטָר בְּיַד הַמַּלְוֶה. וְלָמָּה אֵינוֹ גוֹבֶה. רִבִּי בִּיסְנָא אָמַר. מִפְּנֵי קֳינוֹנִיָא. רִבִּי אָבִינָא אָמַר. מִפְּנֵי פְּסוּל. וְהָכָא מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא פָסוּל. הָתִיב רִבִּי אָבִין. עַד כְּדוֹן בְּשֶׁלָּוָה הַזָּקֵן. שִׁיעְבֵּד הַזָּקֵן. הָכָא אִית לָךְ מֵימָר מִפְּנֵי קֳינוֹנִיָא. לֹא מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא פָסוּל. הָתִיב רִבִּי אָבוּן. וְהָתַנֵּי אַף בְגִיטֵּי נָשִׁים. אִית לָךְ מֵימָר מִפְּנֵי קֳינוֹנִיָיא. לֹא מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא פָסוּל. וְהָכָא מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא פָסוּל.

It was stated: [A claim based on] any of these three types of documents can be collected only from unincumbered property, not from mortgaged property. Rebbi Abba said, that means, if the document in the hand of the lender has not been confirmed. [But if the document in the hand of the lender has been confirmed, he may collect. Rebbi Yose asked: If the document in the hand of the lender has not been confirmed,] he should not be able to collect even from unincumbered property! But one must deal with a document confirmed in the hand of the lender. And why can he not collect? Rebbi Bisna said, because of action in partnership. Rebbi Abina said, because it is invalid And here, because it is invalid. Rebbi Abin asked, so far, if the old man took the loan [and the old man mortgaged. But if the old man took the loan and the son mortgaged,] can you say because of a conspiracy? No, because it is invalid. Rebbi Abun asked, was it not stated: The same holds for bills of divorce? Can you say there, because of action in partnership? No, because it is invalid. And here, because it is invalid.

שְׁלֹשָׁה גִיטִּין פְּסוּלִין כול׳. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יַנַּאי. וְכוּלָּן בִּכְתָב יָדַיִם. רִבִּי לָעְזָר שָׁאַל. עֵדִים יֵשׁ כָּאן. בִּכְתָב יָדַיִם מָה אֲנִי צָרִיךְ. רַב יִרְמְיָה בְשֵׁם רַב. וְכוּלְּהֶם בִּכְתָב יָדַיִם חוּץ מִשֶׁעֵדָיו עַמּוֹ. אָמַר רַב הַמְנוּנָא. הַלָּלוּ חוֹבֵיהוֹן עַל גַּרְמֵיהוֹן. דְּאִינּוּן שֶׁקִּיבְּלוּ עֲלֵיהֶן לְשַׁקֵּר לַחֲתוֹם בְּגֵט שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ זְמָן.

“Three kinds of bills of divorce are invalid,” etc. Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Yannai: All in handwriting. Rebbi Eleazar asked: There are witnesses; why do I need handwriting? Rav Jeremiah in the name of Rav: All in handwriting except if its witnesses are with it. Rav Hamnuna said, they testified to their own sin since they agreed to lie by signing on an undated bill of divorce.

רִבִּי בָּא בַּר הַמְנוּנָא רַב אָדָא בַּר אָחָא בְשֵׁם רַב. דְּרִבִּי מֵאִיר הִיא. מֶה חָמִית מֵימַר כֵּן. אָמַר רִבִּי מָנָא. בְּגִין דְּאָמַר רַב הוּנָא בְשֵׁם רַב. כָּל הָהֵין פִּרְקָא דְּרִבִּי מֵאִיר חוּץ מִשִּׁינָּה שְׁמוֹ וּשְׁמָהּ שֵׁם עִירוֹ וְשֵׁם עִירָהּ. דְּלָא תִסְבּוֹר מֵימַר. קַיְימֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי מֵאִיר הִיא תַנְנָיֵיהּ דְּרַבָּנִן. לְפוּם כֵּן צָרִיךְ מֵימַר. דְּרִבִּי מֵאִיר הִיא. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. בְּגִין דְּרַב וּשְׁמוּאֵל תְּרֵיהוֹן אָמְרִין. הֲלָכָא כְּרִבִּי לָעְזָר. דְּלָא תִסְבּוֹר מֵימַר אוֹף הָכָא. לְפוּם כֵּן צָרִיךְ מֵימַר. דְּרִבִּי מֵאִיר הִיא.

Rebbi Abba bar Hamnuna, Rav Ada bar Aḥa in the name of Rav: This is Rebbi Meїr’s. Why did you have to say this? Rebbi Mana said, since Rav Huna said in the name of Rav: “This entire Chapter is Rebbi Meїr’s except for ‘if he changed his or her name or the name of his or her city.’ ” You should not come to say that the first is Rebbi Meїr’s, the second the rabbis’. Therefore it is necessary to say that this is Rebbi Meїr’s. Rebbi Yose said, since Rav and Samuel both say that practice follows Rebbi Eleazar, that you should not be led to say the same here. Therefore it is necessary to say that this is Rebbi Meїr’s.