## Gittin Daf 3b

###### Gittin 3b:1
[Gittin 3b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/3b:1)

חֲתִימָה לִשְׁמָהּ? אִי רַבִּי מֵאִיר – חֲתִימָה בָּעֵי, כְּתִיבָה לָא בָּעֵי! דִּתְנַן: אֵין כּוֹתְבִין בִּמְחוּבָּר לַקַּרְקַע. כְּתָבוֹ עַל הַמְחוּבָּר לַקַּרְקַע, תְּלָשׁוֹ, חֲתָמוֹ וּנְתָנוֹ לָהּ – כָּשֵׁר!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
that the **signing** must be performed **for her sake? If** it is in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Meir,** he **requires signing** for her sake; however, **he does not require** that the **writing** must be for her sake. **As we learned** in a mishna (21b): **One may not write** a bill of divorce **on** anything that is **attached to the ground,** e.g., a leaf attached to a tree. However, if **he wrote it on** something that is **attached to the ground,** and then he **detached it, signed it, and gave it to her,** it is **valid.** This indicates that the essential stage of writing a bill of divorce is when it is signed by witnesses. The Gemara says that this is Rabbi Meir’s opinion, as an unattributed ruling in the mishna typically follows the opinion of Rabbi Meir.


###### Gittin 3b:2
[Gittin 3b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/3b:2)

אִי רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר – כְּתִיבָה בָּעֵי, חֲתִימָה לָא בָּעֵי! וְכִי תֵּימָא לְעוֹלָם רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר הִיא, וְכִי לָא בָּעֵי רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר חֲתִימָה לִשְׁמָהּ – מִדְּאוֹרָיְיתָא, מִדְּרַבָּנַן – בָּעֵי; וְהָא שְׁלֹשָׁה גִּיטִּין פְּסוּלִין דְּרַבָּנַן, וְלָא בָּעֵי רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר חֲתִימָה לִשְׁמָהּ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**If** it is in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Elazar,** who disagrees with Rabbi Meir and **requires** that the **writing** must be for her sake, **he does not require** that the **signing** must be for her sake. **And if you would say** that **actually** the mishna **is** in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Elazar, and when Rabbi Elazar does not require signing for her sake,** he means **by Torah law,** whereas **by rabbinic law he requires** that bills of divorce must be signed for her sake; **but** that is untenable, as the Sages listed **three bills of divorce** that are valid by Torah law but are **invalid by rabbinic law, and** when he disputes that ruling **Rabbi Elazar does not require** that the **signing** must be **for her sake.**


###### Gittin 3b:3
[Gittin 3b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/3b:3)

דִּתְנַן: שְׁלֹשָׁה גִּיטִּין פְּסוּלִין, וְאִם נִיסַּת הַוָּלָד כָּשֵׁר: כָּתַב בִּכְתַב יָדוֹ וְאֵין עָלָיו עֵדִים, יֵשׁ עָלָיו עֵדִים וְאֵין בּוֹ זְמַן, יֵשׁ בּוֹ זְמַן וְאֵין בּוֹ אֶלָּא עֵד אֶחָד – הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ שְׁלֹשָׁה גִּיטִּין פְּסוּלִין, וְאִם נִיסַּת – הַוָּלָד כָּשֵׁר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**As we learned** in a mishna (86a): **Three bills of divorce** are **invalid** *ab initio*, **but if** the woman **married** another man after having received one of these bills of divorce **the offspring** is of **unflawed** lineage. In other words, she is not considered to be a married woman who engaged in sexual intercourse with another man, which would render their child as one born from an adulterous relationship [*mamzer*]. And these three are: A bill of divorce that the husband **wrote in his handwriting but there are no** signatures of **witnesses on** the document; and if **there are** the signatures of **witnesses on** the document **but there is no date** written **on it;** and if **there is a date** written **on it but it has only one witness** signed on it. **These are** the **three invalid bills of divorce** concerning which the Sages said: **And if she married, the offspring** is of **unflawed** lineage.


###### Gittin 3b:4
[Gittin 3b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/3b:4)

רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר: אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין עָלָיו עֵדִים – אֶלָּא שֶׁנְּתָנוֹ לָהּ בִּפְנֵי עֵדִים; כָּשֵׁר, וְגוֹבֶה מִנְּכָסִים מְשׁוּעְבָּדִים. שֶׁאֵין הָעֵדִים חוֹתְמִים עַל הַגֵּט אֶלָּא מִפְּנֵי תִּיקּוּן הָעוֹלָם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna continues: **Rabbi Elazar says: Even though there are no** signatures of **witnesses on** the document, **but he gave it to her in the presence of** two **witnesses,** it is **a valid** bill of divorce. **And** on the basis of this bill of divorce the woman **can collect** the amount written to her in her marriage contract even **from liened property, as** Rabbi Elazar maintains **that witnesses sign the bill of divorce only for the betterment of the world.** If no witnesses sign a bill of divorce the husband could contest its validity at any time by denying that he wrote it. In any case, it can be seen from this mishna that according to Rabbi Elazar the signatures of the witnesses are not an essential part of a bill of divorce. Consequently, it does not need to be signed for her sake, even by rabbinic law.


###### Gittin 3b:5
[Gittin 3b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/3b:5)

וְאֶלָּא רַבִּי מֵאִיר הִיא, וְכִי לָא בָּעֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר כְּתִיבָה לִשְׁמָהּ – מִדְּאוֹרָיְיתָא, מִדְּרַבָּנַן בָּעֵי; וְהָא אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן, אוֹמֵר הָיָה רַבִּי מֵאִיר: אֲפִילּוּ מְצָאוֹ בְּאַשְׁפָּה,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**But rather,** you can say that the mishna **is** in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Meir, and when Rabbi Meir does not require** that the **writing** must be **for her sake,** he meant **by Torah law,** whereas **by rabbinic law he does require** that the writing must be for her sake. However, the Gemara raises a difficulty against this explanation as well: **But didn’t Rav Naḥman say** that **Rabbi Meir would say:** A bill of divorce need not be written for her sake, and **even** if a husband **found** a bill of divorce **in the garbage,** and the names of the man and woman in the bill of divorce are the same as his name and that of his wife,