| 160b. זה פשוט וחתום זה מקושר והעד שנים עדים שלשה הא כיצד שנים לפשוט שלשה למקושר,ואיפוך אנא מתוך שנתרבה בקשריו נתרבה בעדיו,רפרם אמר מהכא (ירמיהו לב, יא) ואקח את ספר המקנה את החתום המצוה והחקים ואת הגלוי ואקח את ספר המקנה זה פשוט את החתום זה מקושר ואת הגלוי זה פשוט שבמקושר,המצוה והחקים אלו דברים שבין פשוט למקושר הא כיצד זה עדיו שנים וזה עדיו שלשה זה עדיו מתוכו וזה עדיו מאחוריו,ואיפוך אנא מתוך שנתרבה בקשריו נתרבה בעדיו,רמי בר יחזקאל אמר מהכא (דברים יט, טו) על פי שנים עדים או על פי שלשה עדים יקום דבר אם תתקיים עדותן בשנים למה פרט לך בשלשה לומר לך שנים לפשוט שלשה למקושר,ואיפוך אנא מתוך שנתרבה בקשריו נתרבה בעדיו,והני להכי הוא דאתו כל חד וחד למילתיה הוא דאתא לכדתניא (ירמיהו לב, מד) שדות בכסף יקנו וכתוב בספר וחתום עצה טובה קא משמע לן ואקח את ספר המקנה הכי הוה מעשה על פי שנים עדים או על פי שלשה עדים להקיש שלשה לשנים בפלוגתא דרבי עקיבא ורבנן,אלא מקושר מדרבנן וקראי אסמכתא בעלמא,וטעמא מאי תקינו רבנן מקושר אתרא דכהני הוו והוו קפדי טובא ומגרשי נשייהו ועבדי רבנן תקנתא אדהכי והכי מיתבא דעתייהו,התינח גיטין שטרות מאי איכא למימר כדי שלא תחלק בין גיטין לשטרות,היכן עדים חותמין רב הונא אמר בין קשר לקשר ורב ירמיה בר אבא אמר אחורי הכתב וכנגד הכתב מבחוץ,אמר ליה רמי בר חמא לרב חסדא לרב הונא דאמר בין קשר לקשר קא סלקא דעתין בין קשר לקשר מגואי והא ההוא מקושר דקאתא לקמיה דרבי ואמר רבי אין זמן בזה אמר ליה רבי שמעון ברבי לרבי שמא בין קשריו מובלע פלייה וחזייה ואם איתא אין זמן בזה ואין עדים בזה מיבעי ליה,אמר ליה מי סברת בין קשר לקשר מגואי לא בין קשר לקשר מאבראי,וניחוש דלמא זייף וכתב מאי דבעי וחתימי סהדי,דכתיב ביה שריר וקיים,וניחוש דלמא כתב מאי דבעי והדר כתב שריר וקיים אחרינא חד שריר וקיים כתבינן תרי שריר וקיים לא כתבינן,וליחוש דלמא מחיק ליה לשריר וקיים וכתב מאי דבעי והדר כתב שריר וקיים הא אמר ר' יוחנן תלויה מקויימת כשרה | 160b. bthisis referring to ban ordinarydocument. When the verse states: b“And seal them,” thisis referring to ba tieddocument. The next phrase, “and call witnesses [ iveha’ed edim /i],” which more literally would be translated: And have witnesses bear witness, is interpreted as follows: b“And have bear witness [ iveha’ed /i],”this indicates the need for btwowitnesses, as the term “witness [ ied /i]” in the Torah generally refers to two witnesses. As to the word b“witnesses [ iedim /i],”this additional term indicates the need for bthreewitnesses. bHow so?How can the verse call for both two witnesses and three witnesses? Rabbi Ḥanina explains: bTwowitnesses are required bfor an ordinarydocument, and bthreeare required bfor a tieddocument.,The Gemara questions this explanation: bBut Ican just as well breverseit, requiring two witnesses for a tied document and three for an ordinary one. The Gemara answers: bSincethe tied document requires bmoreto be done bwith regard to its ties,it stands to reason that it requires bmoreto be done bwith regard to its witnesses,requiring three rather than two., bRafram saysthat there is a different source for two kinds of documents, bfrom here: “So I took the deed of the purchase, that which was sealed, the terms and conditions, and that which was open”(Jeremiah 32:11). When the verse states: b“So I took the deed of the purchase,” thisis referring to ban ordinarydocument. When it states: b“That which was sealed,” thisis referring to ba tieddocument. When it states: b“And that which was open,” thisis referring to the bordinary,unfolded part bof a tieddocument.,Rafram continues: With regard to the phrase: b“The terms and conditions,” these are the matters thatdistinguish ban ordinarydocument bfrom a tiedone. bHow so?What are the details that differentiate the two types of documents? bThisone, the ordinary document, has btwo witnesses, and thatone, the tied document, has bthree witnesses.And in bthisone, the ordinary document, bits witnessesare signed binside it,on the front side, while in bthatone, the tied document, bits witnessesare signed bon the back of it. /b,The Gemara questions this explanation: bBut Ican just as well breverseit, requiring two witnesses for a tied document and three for an ordinary one. The Gemara answers: bSincethe tied document requires bmoreto be done bwith regard to its ties,it stands to reason that it requires bmoreto be done bwith regard to its witnesses,requiring three rather than two., bRami bar Yeḥezkel saidthat there is a different source for two sets of ihalakhotfor two types of documents bfrom here: “At the mouth of two witnesses or at the mouth of three witnesses shall a matter be established”(Deuteronomy 19:15). bIfwitnesses’ btestimony is established with twowitnesses, bwhydid the verse bspecify for youthat it is also established bwith three,which is self-evident? Rather, this verse serves bto tell youthat there is a requirement for btwowitnesses bfor an ordinarydocument, and a requirement for bthreewitnesses bfor a tieddocument.,The Gemara questions this explanation: bBut Ican just as well breverseit, requiring two witnesses for a tied document and three for an ordinary one. The Gemara answers: bSincethe tied document requires bmoreto be done bwith regard to its ties,it stands to reason that it requires bmoreto be done bwith regard to its witnesses,requiring three rather than two.,The Gemara asks: bAndis it so that btheseverses bare coming for thispurpose, to teach that there are two types of documents? But beach and every oneof them bcomes for itsown bpurpose.The first verse comes bfor that which is taughtin a ibaraita /i: When the verse states: b“They shall buy fields for money, and subscribe the deeds, and seal them,and call witnesses” (Jeremiah 32:44), it is merely to bteach us good advice,that people should carefully document their purchases in order to provide permanent proof of purchase. When the verse states: b“So I took the deed of the purchase”(Jeremiah 32:11), bthis wasmerely how that bincidentoccurred, and the phrase is not intended to teach any ihalakhot /i. When the verse states: b“At the mouth of two witnesses or at the mouth of three witnessesshall a matter be established” (Deuteronomy 19:15), this is stated in order bto juxtapose threewitnesses bwith twowitnesses for several reasons, as delineated bin the dispute between Rabbi Akiva and the Rabbis( iMakkot5b).,The Gemara explains: bRather,the entire institution of the btieddocument is brabbinicin origin, bandall these bversesthat were cited above by various iamora’imwere intended as bmere supportfor the concept of a tied document, as opposed to actual sources.,The Gemara asks: bAnd what is the reasonthat bthe Sages institutedthe btieddocument? The Gemara explains: There was ba place where there weremany bpriests, and they were very quick tempered, and they wouldseek to bdivorce their wivesimpetuously. The ihalakhais that a priest may not marry a divorcée, even his own ex-wife. These priests, who acted impetuously, often regretted having divorced their wives. bAndtherefore, bthe Sages instituted an ordicethat the bill of divorce for these people should be of the tied format, which is a long, drawn-out process, hoping that bmeanwhile, their composure would be regainedand they would reconsider their decision to divorce.,The Gemara asks: This bworks out wellfor bbills of divorce,but bwhat can be saidwith regard to other bdocuments?Why is this procedure used for other documents as well? The Gemara answers: This was instituted bso that you should not differentiate between bills of divorce andother bdocuments. /b,§ bWhere do the witnesses signon a tied document? bRav Huna says:They sign bbetween each tiedfold. bAnd Rav Yirmeya bar Abba says:They sign bon the back of the writtenside, taking care that the signatures are exactly bopposite the writing, on the outside. /b, bRami bar Ḥama said to Rav Ḥisda: According to Rav Huna, who saysthat the witnesses sign bbetween each tiedfold, it benters our mindthat he meant bbetween each tiedfold bon the insideof the document. bButthis is difficult, as there was ba certain tieddocument bthat came before RabbiYehuda HaNasi, band RabbiYehuda HaNasi, not realizing it was tied, bsaid: There is no date on thisdocument, so it is not valid. Then, bRabbi Shimon, son of RabbiYehuda HaNasi, bsaid to RabbiYehuda HaNasi: bPerhapsthe date is bhidden between the tiedfolds. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi bopened it and sawthat the date was in fact between the tied folds. bAnd if it is sothat the witnesses sign between each tied fold on the inside of the document, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi bshould havehad two objections, and said: bThere is no date on thisdocument, band there arealso bno witnessessigned bon thisdocument.,Rav Ḥisda bsaid to him: Do you maintainthat Rav Huna meant that the witnesses sign bbetween the tiedfolds bon the inside? No,he meant bbetween the tiedfolds bon the outsideof the document.,The Gemara questions Rav Huna’s opinion: bBut let us be concernedthat bperhapsthe party holding the document bfalsifiedsome information band wrote whatever he wanted. Andthis is a concern, as there are already bwitnesses signedon the document. In an ordinary document the witnesses sign immediately following the text, so there is no possibility of adding to the text. A tied document has part of its text written in the folds, but also has a part written on the face of the document on the unfolded paper, before or after the text in the folded part. If the witnesses sign between the folds there is the possibility of writing additional text in the unfolded section.,The Gemara explains: The case is one bwhere it is written inthe document: Everything is bconfirmed and established.That is, every folded document must contain this formula at the end of the text, to prevent forgery, as any writing after this formula would be disregarded.,The Gemara questions this explanation: bBut let us be concernedthat bperhapsthe holder of the document bwrote whatever he wanted and afterward wrote anothertime: Everything is bconfirmed and established.The Gemara explains: bWe writeonly bonedeclaration of: Everything is bconfirmed and established; we do not write twodeclarations of: Everything is bconfirmed and established.Therefore, anything written after the first declaration would be rejected, even if followed by a repetition of the declaration.,The Gemara questions further: bBut letthere be ba concernthat bperhapsthe holder of the document berasedthe declaration: Everything is bconfirmed and established, andthen bwrote whatever he wantedover the erasure, band afterward wrotethe declaration: Everything is bconfirmed and established.The Gemara responds: How could this happen? bDoesn’t Rabbi Yoḥa say:A document that includes ba suspendedcorrection of text inserted between lines of the document, which is bverifiedat the end of the document, bis valid; /b |
