Study Gittin folio 4A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
and he signed it and gave it to his wife, it is a valid bill of divorce? And if you would say that we learned that this statement of Rav Naḥman applies by Torah law, whereas by rabbinic law R' Meir concedes that a bill of divorce must be written for her sake, if so, Rav Naḥman should have said: R'
Rather, the Talmud retracts the previous answer and states: Actually, the Mishnah is in accordance with the opinion of R' Elazar, and when does R' Elazar not require that the signing must be for her sake? Where there are no witnesses at all on the bill of divorce. However, where there are witnesse
Rav Ashi said a different explanation: In accordance with whose opinion is this Mishnah? It is in accordance with a third opinion, that of R' Yehuda. As we learned in a Mishnah (21b): R' Yehuda invalidates a bill of divorce unless its writing and signing are performed on an item that is detached fro
The Talmud asks: And initially, what is the reason we did not establish the Mishnah in accordance with the opinion of R' Yehuda? Since R' Yehuda’s opinion is explicitly stated in a Mishnah, isn’t it obvious that this Mishnah also follows his ruling?
The Talmud answers: We seek to explain the Mishnah in accordance with the opinion of R' Meir, as there is a general principle that a ruling in an unattributed Mishnah is in accordance with the opinion of R' Meir. Likewise, we seek to interpret the Mishnah in accordance with the ruling of R' Elazar