חָיְישִׁינַן שֶׁמָּא פִּיֵּיס. וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אֲמַר: אֲפִילּוּ מִכָּאן וְעַד עֲשָׂרָה יָמִים; אִם אִיתָא דְּפִיֵּיס – קָלָא אִית לֵיהּ לְמִילְּתָא.

Why not? Because we are concerned that perhaps he appeased his wife and engaged in sexual intercourse with her, thereby invalidating the bill of divorce. And Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Even if the delay in signing was from now until ten days later Rabbi Shimon deems it valid. There is no concern that he appeased her because if it is so that he appeased her, then the matter becomes public knowledge, and all would hear of it.

אִיתְּמַר: אָמַר לַעֲשָׂרָה ״כִּתְבוּ גֵּט לְאִשְׁתִּי״, אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: שְׁנַיִם מִשּׁוּם עֵדִים, וְכוּלָּם מִשּׁוּם תְּנַאי, וְרֵישׁ לָקִישׁ אָמַר: כּוּלָּם מִשּׁוּם עֵדִים.

§ It was stated that Rabbi Yoḥanan and Reish Lakish disagreed with regard to the following case: If the husband says to ten men: Write a bill of divorce for my wife, Rabbi Yoḥanan says: He means that all of them should sign the bill of divorce. Two of them function as witnesses, and all the rest of them sign the bill of divorce only due to the stipulation that the husband had stated. He made the bill of divorce dependent upon all of them signing, but he did not mean that ten men need to actually function as witnesses. And Reish Lakish says: All of them function as witnesses.

הֵיכִי דָמֵי? אִילֵימָא דְּלָא אֲמַר לְהוּ ״כּוּלְּכֶם״, וְהָא תְּנַן: אָמַר לַעֲשָׂרָה ״כִּתְבוּ גֵּט לְאִשְׁתִּי״, אֶחָד כּוֹתֵב וּשְׁנַיִם חוֹתְמִין! אֶלָּא דַּאֲמַר לְהוּ ״כּוּלְּכֶם״.

The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances in which all of them have to sign? If we say that he did not say to them: All of you, but just said to them: You should write a bill of divorce for my wife, didn’t we learn in a mishna (66b) that if one said to ten people: Write a bill of divorce for my wife, then one would write, and two would sign, and not all ten of them are required to sign. Rather, the case of their dispute is when he said to them: All of you write a bill of divorce for my wife, and in this instance is was taught later on in that mishna that one person writes the bill of divorce and everyone else must sign it.

מַאי בֵּינַיְיהוּ? אִיכָּא בֵּינַיְיהוּ דַּחֲתוּם בֵּי תְּרֵי מִינַּיְיהוּ בְּיוֹמֵיהּ, וְאִינָּךְ מִכָּאן וְעַד עֲשָׂרָה יָמִים. מַאן דְּאָמַר מִשּׁוּם תְּנַאי – כָּשֵׁר; וּמַאן דְּאָמַר מִשּׁוּם עֵדִים – פָּסוּל.

The Gemara asks: What is the difference between Rabbi Yoḥanan and Reish Lakish; what is the difference if the rest of the men function as witnesses or just in order to fulfill the man’s stipulation? The Gemara answers: There is a difference between them in a case where two of them signed on that day and the rest signed not on the day it was written but from now until ten days later. According to the one who says that the other signatures are due to the stipulation, the bill of divorce is valid, because two witnesses signed the bill of divorce on the same day that it was written, and the stipulation was also fulfilled. And according to the one who says that all these people sign due to his wish that they all function as witnesses, it is invalid because not all the witnesses signed the bill of divorce on the day it was written.

אִי נַמִי: כְּגוֹן שֶׁנִּמְצָא אֶחָד מֵהֶם קָרוֹב אוֹ פָּסוּל. לְמַאן דְּאָמַר מִשּׁוּם תְּנַאי – כָּשֵׁר, לְמַאן דְּאָמַר מִשּׁוּם עֵדִים – פָּסוּל.

Alternatively, there is another difference between them, in a case where one of these ten people is found to be a relative of the husband or wife, or is otherwise found to be disqualified to serve as a witness. According to the one who says that the other signatures are due to the stipulation, this bill of divorce is valid because the disqualified person did not serve as a witness. He just signed the bill of divorce in order to fulfill the stipulation, and the bill of divorce has the signature of two qualified witnesses. According to the one who says that all these people sign due to the man’s wish that they all function as witnesses, the bill of divorce would be invalid, as is the case whenever one member of a group of witnesses is disqualified.

אִי חֲתוּם בַּתְּחִילָּה קָרוֹב אוֹ פָּסוּל, אָמְרִי לָהּ: כָּשֵׁר, וְאָמְרִי לָהּ: פָּסוּל. אָמְרִי לָהּ כָּשֵׁר – תְּנַאי הוּא, אָמְרִי לָהּ פָּסוּל – אָתֵי לְאִיחְלוּפֵי בִּשְׁטָרוֹת דְּעָלְמָא.

The Gemara adds another point of dispute: According to Rabbi Yoḥanan, who holds that the other witnesses sign due to the husband’s stipulation, if a relative or other disqualified witness signed at the beginning, before two valid witnesses had signed, then some say the bill of divorce is valid and some say that it is invalid. Some say that it is valid because the request for ten signatures is a stipulation. Since these ten people are not meant to serve as witnesses and are meant only to fulfill the stipulation, it makes no difference if they signed at the beginning or at the end. Some say that it is invalid because there is a concern that the courts will come to confuse it with typical documents, and they will rely on disqualified witnesses in those cases.

הַהוּא דַּאֲמַר לְהוּ לַעֲשָׂרָה: ״כִּתְבוּ גֵּט לְאִשְׁתִּי״, חֲתוּם בֵּי תְּרֵי מִינַּיְיהוּ בְּיוֹמֵיהּ וְאִינָּךְ מִכָּאן וְעַד עֲשָׂרָה יָמִים, אֲתָא לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי. אֲמַר לֵיהּ:

It is told: There was a certain person who said to ten men: Write a bill of divorce for my wife. Two of them signed that day and the others signed after a delay from now until ten days later. He came before Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi to ask what the halakha is with regard to such a bill of divorce. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said to him: