המביא – נחתם חציו – one of the witnesses signed in my presence.

נכתב חציו וכו' פסול – and specifically the final half. But [if the agent said}: “in my presence, the first-half was written, which is the [the section containing the] name of the man and [the name of] the woman and the time (i.e. date), it is valid. And [regarding] the first half as well, it is not necessary for him [the agent] to see the writing itself, but if he heard the sound of the reed/writing pen alone passing over the paper at the time of the writing [of the Jewish bill of divorce], nothing further is necessary.

אחד אומר בפני נכתב ואחד אומר בפני נחתם פסול – at the time when the Jewish bill of divorce leaves from under the hand of one of them (i.e., the agents), and since the Rabbis required for the agent who brings the Jewish bill of divorce to say both [things] (i.e. that the Get was written in my presence and that the Get was signed in my presence), but if the Jewish bill of divorce leaves the hands of both of them (i.e., the agents), it is considered valid. For two [individuals] who brought a Jewish bill of divorce, they do not need to say, “in our presence it was written and in our presence it was signed.”

שנים אומרים בפנינו נכתב ואחד אומר בפני נחתם פסול – At the time when the Jewish bill of divorce leaves under the hand of one of them, but if it leaves the hand of both of them, it is valid.

ור' יהודה מכשיר – And even if the Jewish bill of divorce leaves the hand of one of them, and the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehuda.

בלילה ונחתם ביום כשר – since the daytime goes after the [previous] night, and this is not in advance/early.

ביום ונחתם בלילה פסול – since it is early. And the Sages instituted the time in Jewish bills of divorce, decreed, less a person would be married with his sister’s daughter (niece}, and she will commit an offense against him, and he has compassion upon her that she not be strangled to death, and he gives her a Jewish bill of divorce without the time included, and when they testify against her in the Jewish court, she takes out her Jewish bill of divorce and states that she was a divorcee and was a free (literally, “open”) woman at that time.

ור"ש מכשיר – (a Jewish bill of divorce written in the daytime and signed at night), for Rabbi Shimon thinks (i.e., “holds”) that the Sages established [putting] the time in the Jewish bill of divorce because of the usufruct [involved], for if the time would not be [stated] in the Jewish bill of divorce, the husband would sell the usufruct (the wife’s estate of which the husband has fruition without responsibility for loss or deterioration – while married] of his wife after the divorce, and when she would claim against him in court, he would claim that he sold it prior to the divorce. And Rabbi Shimon validates this when it [the Jewish bill of divorce] was written during the day time and signed at night, even though it is in advance. For he holds that from the time that he desired to divorce her even though he had not [yet] divorced her, from then on, the husband does not have [access to] the usufruct, but the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Shimon.

בדיו – “Almidar” in Arabic

סיקרא – Red color

קומוס – resin/sap of the tree

קנקנתום – Vidriolov in foreign tongue

על העלה של זית – detached

ונותן לה את הפרה – as he is not able to cut it after it is written, as it is written (Deuteronomy 24:3); “[then this latter man rejects her,] writes her a bill of divorcement, hands it to her [and sends her away from his house;…” which is not requiring other than writing and giving [the Jewish bill of divorce], excluding the situation which is requiring the writing [of the Jewish bill of divorce], cutting it [from where it was written] and giving it [to the woman].

רבי יוסי הגלילי אומר וכו' – Since the All-Merciful (i.e., the Torah) refers to a Jewish bill of a divorce as a ספר/bill [of divorcement] (Deuteronomy 25:1, 3); just as a bill (book) is unique and has no life-spirit in it and does not eat, so too everything which has no life-spirit in it and does not eat. And the Rabbis state that if he wrote it [the Jewish bill of divorce] in a document as you stated, here where it the word "ספר"/bill – it comes [to refer not to the writing material but merely to] the act of writing the words (formula of divorce (see Gittin 21b). And the Halakha is according to the Sages.

אין כותבין במחובר – because it is missing “cutting.”

כתבו על המחובר וכו' – This is how it should be said: If he wrote [the Jewish bill of the divorce] the blank form of the document [of the Jewish bill of divorce] on something attached, which is the entire Jewish bill of divorce except for the place of the man and the place of the woman and the time (i.e., date).

תלשו וחתמו – that is to say, that he [the scribe] wrote that part of the document that makes it binding, which is the place of the man and the place of the woman and the time (i.e., date).

כשר – For since the part of the document that makes it binding was written on [something] detached, even though the blank form of the document was written while it was attached, it is valid.

על נייר המחוק – because he can go back and erase it until [the names of the witnesses] and write upon it what he wants and no one would recognize anything, for the signature of the witnesses is written over an erasure.

דיפתרא – its erasure is not recognized. דיפתרא – that is, [prepared] with salt and flour, but not prepared with gall-nut juice.

וחכמים מכשירין – [The Sages validate] only in Jewish bills of divorce alone, as they think that the witnesses who deliver the Jewish bill of divorce [to the woman] make it [the divorce] final. For the Jewish bill of divorce that is delivered in the presence of the witnesses is the essence of the Jewish divorce, and not the witnesses who signed it [i.e., the Jewish bill of divorce]. But on other documents, we rely upon the witnesses who signed it [i.e., the document]. The Sages admit that it [the Jewish bill of divorce] cannot be written either on a blotted-out paper or on something prepared with gall-nut juice. And the Halakha is according the Sages.

ואפילו חרש שוטה וקטן – [and concerning them – the deaf-mute, imbecile and minor], a Jewish adult stands over them and says to him: Write this for the sake of “so-and-so.” But a heathen and a slave, even if an adult Jew stands over them, ab initio, he should not write the Jewish bill of divorce, because they have the temperament [to write a Jewish bill of divorce], and on their personal knowledge we operate, for even if a Jewish adult says to him: “Write for the sake of “so-and-so” , he should not write other than for himself. But if a heathen or slave wrote the blank form of the document [of the Jewish bill of divorce] and a Jew possessing awareness wrote the part of the document that makes it binding; which is the name of the man and the woman and the time (i.e., date), for all of these require [being written] for their sake (i.e., the man, the woman and the Jewish bill of divorce), the Jewish bill of divorce is valid. And similarly, a when we say in our Mishnah that a deaf-mute, imbecile and/or minor are fit to write a Jewish bill of divorce, these words refer to the blank form of the document, but not the part of the document that makes it binding, is not valid, other than if it is written by an adult Jew who possesses awareness.

חוץ מחרש שוטה וקטן – who all lack awareness.

וסומא – [A blind person] is prohibited from bring a Jewish bill of divorce from outside the land of Israel, because he is unable to say, “it was written in my presence and signed in my presence.” But, to bring a Jewish bill of divorce in the land of Israel, where it is not necessary to say, “it was written in my presence and signed in my presence,” or even in the Diaspora, if the Jewish bill of divorce is verified through its signatories, or to serve as the agent of the woman to receive her Jewish bill of divorce, for all of these, the blind person is considered valid.

ונכרי – he is not [included] in laws of Divorce and Kiddushin/betrothal for the sake of marriage, and anything of his own person is not worthy, he cannot perform the act of agency for another.

קיבל הקטן – [The minor received] the Jewish bill of divorce from the hand of the husband.

והגדיל – [became an adult] prior to his delivery of it [i.e., the Jewish bill of divorce] to her [i.e., the wife].

פתוח ונסתמא וחזר ונתפתח – even if he was not restored to being sighted, since he was able to see at the time when he received the Jewish bill of divorce, he well is able to serve as an agent for he is able to say: “it was written in my presence and it was signed in my presence.” But, since it is required for [the Mishnah] to teach the concluding segment, “and he returned to being sighted,” that he [the agent] must be cognitively aware at the time of the giving [of the Jewish bill of divorce], the Mishnah teaches also at the beginning, “and he returned to being sighted.” But all those who are invalid for testimony through sin, are also invalid to bring the Jewish bill of divorce, for they are not believed to say, “it was written in my presence and signed in my presence.” But if the Jewish bill of divorce is verified through its signatories, they are valid to bring it (i.e., the Jewish bill of divorce).

וחמותה ובת חמותה כו' – [they] are not believed to say that her husband died, because they hate her and intend to disgrace her.

ובלבד שהיא צריכה לומר בפני נכתב ובפני נחתם – and especially when the husband made a condition with her at the time that he delivered the Jewish bill of divorce to her hand and said to her: You will not be divorced other than in the court of so-and-so, and you will say, “it was written in my presence and signed in my presence.” And the court takes it [i.e., the Jewish bill of divorce] from her hand after she said, “it was written in my presence and signed in my presence,” and appoint an agent who will go back and give it [i.e., the Jewish bill of divorce] to her, but the wife whose Jewish bill of divorce leaves her hand in whatever place she happens to be, is [considered to be] divorced. And even if the Jewish bill of divorce’s signatories are not verified, and she does not have to say, “it was written in my presence and signed in my presence.”